下载文档原格式
高中地理学习中的男女性别差异作者：陈佑淋来源：《科教导刊》2018年第05期摘要《普通高中地理课程标准》提出，教师应根据学生的特点和差异，因材施教，改变教学方法。
由于受到生理、心理和环境多方面影响，高中男女生在地理学习方面存在差异。
本文通过问卷调查和数据分析，定量地研究了男女之间的性别差异。
得出男生的空间能力的逻辑能力强于女生；女生的语言能力和人际交往能力强于男生的结论。
根据男女生的学习特点，选择不同的教学方法。
关键词性别差异高中地理学习影响中图分类号：G633.55 文献标识码：A DOI：10.16400/ki.kjdkz.2018.02.085《普通高中地理课程标准》提出，教师应该根据学生的个体差异，积极探索适合学生的教学方式。
目前国内学者对高中生性别差异并未深入研究。
本文从男女性别差异的角度分析高中地理学习，针对其表现，提出适合的教学策略，实现“因材施教”的教学原则。
1数据与方法在教育学、心理学和性别差异等理论的指导下，以福建省福州市长乐区第一中学学生为调查对象，开展高中男女生地理学习的性别差异调查。
对结果进行分析，得出男女之间，地理学习差异的表现和原因。
2结论分析2.1男女性别和地理学习成绩本文采用虚拟变量来研究性别差异，对男性的赋值为1，对女性的赋值为2。
将成绩从优秀到不及格分为四个等级。
100-85赋值为1，85-70赋值为2，70-60赋值为3，60以下赋值为4。
表1可知，Sig（双尾）2.2男女性别和地理学习特点由表2可知，在课程内容方面，男生喜欢自然地理，女生喜欢人文地理，而喜欢区域地理的人数相差不大。
说明男生更喜欢数理逻辑类型的学习内容，女生更喜欢理解记忆类型的学习内容。
表3可知，在授课方式方面，男生更喜欢师生互动，女生更喜欢教师讲授。
说明男生多是场独立的认知方式，而女生是场依存的认知方式。
教师的授课风格和个人特点，对女生的影响大于男生。
表4可知，在记忆方式上，男生喜欢理解记忆，女生喜欢背诵记忆。
生物学视角下的性别差异研究性别差异一直是社会科学的研究重点，而在生物学中，对性别差异的探索也一直是一个引人注目的领域。
从人类的生理特征到行为表现，性别在生物学中扮演着重要的角色。
本文将从生物学的视角出发，探讨性别差异的一些主要方面，并探讨其中的原因。
一、生理差异1.性染色体在人类中，性别基因由性染色体决定，男性拥有XY染色体，女性则拥有XX染色体。
这导致了男性和女性在染色体组成上的差异。
此外，男性还有比女性更多的性激素，如睾酮和雄激素，这会对其身体特征产生影响。
2.身体特征男性和女性在生理上存在许多差异。
男性通常比女性更高，骨骼更重，肌肉质量更大。
女性则在乳房和盆骨的发育上更为明显。
此外，男性和女性的生殖系统也有明显差异，在生殖器官的发育和功能上存在显著区别。
3.激素差异激素在控制人体各个方面的发育和功能中扮演着重要角色。
在性别差异方面，主要的激素包括雄激素和雌激素。
雄激素如睾酮对于男性的性征发育至关重要，而雌激素则负责女性的生殖器官的发育和其他身体特征的形成。
二、认知差异1.心理特征科学研究表明，男性和女性在认知方面存在一些差异。
例如，男性在空间感知和数学方面的表现通常比女性更优秀，而女性在语言表达和人际交往方面则表现得更出色。
这些差异可能与脑结构和激素水平的差异有关。
2.性别身份认同性别身份认同是个体对于自己认为属于男性或女性的一种主观认知。
研究发现，男性和女性在性别身份认同上存在明显差异。
这可能受到生物学因素、社会文化因素以及个体经验的共同影响。
三、行为差异1.社会角色在社会中，男性和女性通常扮演不同的角色。
男性更常从事体力劳动和领导职位，而女性则更多从事照顾和教育工作。
这些社会角色往往与性别之间的生物学差异紧密相连。
2.性行为性行为是性别差异的另一方面，男性和女性在性行为偏好和需求上存在差异。
男性倾向于主动追求性关系，并表现出更高程度的性欲。
女性则更注重情感和亲密关系。
3.竞争与合作研究发现，男性和女性在竞争和合作方面表现出不同的倾向。
中学教育的性别差异问题及应对策略一、引言中学教育是培养未来社会栋梁的重要阶段，然而，有研究表明，中学教育中存在着性别差异问题。
性别差异不仅会影响学生的学习成绩，还可能对人格发展、职业规划等方面产生深远影响。
因此，解决中学教育的性别差异问题并采取相应的应对策略至关重要。
二、性别差异的存在及影响1. 学习成绩差异统计数据显示，在数学和科学等学科上，男性学生往往表现更出色，而女性学生在语言和人文学科方面更具优势。
这种性别差异的存在可能与学科特点、教学方式以及社会观念等因素有关。
然而，这种学科分化也可能影响到学生的综合素质发展和职业选择。
2. 自信心与自我期待研究发现，男性学生往往比女性学生更具自信心和自我期待，他们更容易对自己看得起，从而在学习和生活中表现得更加积极。
相比之下，女性学生可能面临更多的自我怀疑和自我限制，这限制了她们的个人发展和职业选择。
3. 社会角色与职业规划传统观念中，男性通常被认为适合从事理工科和技术领域的职业，而女性则更适合从事文科、社会科学和教育等领域。
这种观念对学生的职业规划产生了重要影响，从而进一步加剧了性别差异问题。
三、应对策略1. 平等教育针对性别差异问题，中学教育应始终坚持平等原则，提供公平的学习环境和机会。
教师在日常教学中应避免性别歧视，鼓励学生相互尊重和平等对待，并纠正和消除隐性性别刻板印象的存在。
2. 科学教学方法中学教师应根据学科特点和学生需求，采用多样化的教学方法。
例如，在女生较强的语言学科中，可以多采用小组讨论、合作学习等方式，促使女生更积极地参与到学习中。
3. 补充教育资源学校可以增加额外的教育资源，鼓励学生发展兴趣爱好，提供丰富多样的社团活动和选修课程。
通过这些课外活动的参与，可以帮助学生充分发展个人潜能，增强自身的综合素质。
4. 职业规划与指导学校应提供全面的职业规划咨询和指导，帮助学生了解各种不同职业领域的机会和挑战。
重要的是，要鼓励女性学生积极选择理工科等传统男性领域，并提供相应的培训和支持。
高中教育的性别差异问题在当今社会，性别差异问题一直备受关注。
尽管在许多领域中已经取得了显著进展，但高中教育仍然存在着明显的性别差异。
本文将探讨高中教育中存在的性别差异问题，分析其影响因素，并提出可能的解决方案。
一、性别差异的现状在高中教育中，男女学生之间存在显著的性别差异。
首先是学科选择方面的差异。
通常来说，男学生更倾向于选择理科和工程类的学科，而女学生更倾向于选择文科和社会科学。
这导致了男生在数学、物理等学科中占据绝对优势，而女生在语言、文学等学科中稍占优势。
其次，男生在课堂表现方面更加活跃自信，而女生普遍较为内向和保守，影响了她们的学习成绩和自信心。
二、性别差异产生的原因1. 社会观念和性别刻板印象性别刻板印象对高中学生的学科选择和学习态度产生了重要影响。
社会观念认为，男孩更适合理科类学科，女孩更适合文科类学科。
这种刻板印象导致了学生在学科选择上的偏好，进而影响了学业发展。
2. 家庭教育和环境差异家庭教育和环境也是性别差异的重要原因之一。
不同家庭对男女孩子的期望和教育方式存在差异。
许多家庭更注重男孩的科学和技术能力的培养，而对女孩的语言能力和人文素养更为关注。
这种家庭环境对学生的学科选择和学习态度产生了不可忽视的影响。
3. 师资和学校支持差异高中教育中的师资和学校支持也是影响性别差异的重要因素。
有些学校在资源分配上存在偏向男生的情况，比如更多的科研机会和实践项目。
同时，教师对男生学生更加关注，而对女生学生较为忽视。
这些因素会导致男生在学习环境中处于有利地位，进而增加了性别差异。
三、解决性别差异的可能措施1. 淡化性别刻板印象社会对男女性别角色的刻板印象应该得到改变，重视倡导性别平等和多元发展。
平等的性别观念可以减少年轻人的性别偏见和歧视，从而为学生提供更加公平的学习环境。
2. 优化师资和教学资源学校应该加强师资队伍的建设，提供平等的教学资源，以确保男女学生都能够享受到同等的学习机会和支持。
教师也需要关注女生学生的需求，帮助她们提高自信和学习动力。
性别差异在学习中的表现与影响性别差异在学习中一直都是一个备受关注的话题。
许多研究表明，男女之间在学习能力、学习方式以及成绩方面存在着一定的差异。
然而，这种差异究竟是基于生理因素还是社会因素，是以固定模式出现还是受到外界环境的影响，引起了人们的广泛争议。
本文将从不同层面讨论性别差异在学习中的表现与影响。
首先，在学习能力方面，男女之间存在一定的差异。
一些研究认为，男性相对于女性在数理能力方面更具优势，而女性在语言和表达方面更具天赋。
这种差异可以追溯到大脑结构上的生理因素。
男性大脑的右半球相对较发达，使得他们在空间感知和逻辑推理方面具有一定的优势；而女性大脑的左右半球更加均衡，使得她们在语言理解和情感表达方面更为敏感。
然而，也有研究指出这种差异并不是绝对的，个体差异和环境因素同样重要。
其次，在学习方式方面，男女有着不同的特点。
男性倾向于以竞争和探索的方式进行学习，喜欢进行实验和试错；而女性则更倾向于合作和探究，喜欢运用创造性思维解决问题。
这种差异在学科选择上也有所体现。
比如，男生更容易选择理工科，而女生更容易选择人文科学。
这种差异部分受到了社会认知和社会角色期望的影响。
经过多年的社会观念灌输，男孩被鼓励从事理科，女孩则被鼓励从事文科。
这种社会角色对性别差异的形成起到了一定的促进作用。
性别差异在学习中还会对个体的学习成绩产生一定的影响。
研究发现，男生在数学和自然科学等方面的表现普遍优于女生；而女生在语言和文科方面的表现则相对优秀。
然而，在同一学科中，不同性别的学生成绩差异并不是绝对的。
个体差异在学习成绩中扮演了重要的角色。
某些女生可能在数学方面表现突出，一些男生则可能在语言表达方面有优势。
因此，不能单纯地将性别差异作为评估学习能力的唯一标准，还应该关注个体差异和发展潜力。
此外，性别差异在学习上可能会给个体带来一定的挫折和影响。
社会对于男孩的期望更多地集中在成功和竞争上，而对女孩的期望则更多地体现在合作和情感表达上。
科学教育中的性别差异与平等教育科学教育是培养学生科学素养和科学方法论的过程，旨在提高学生的科学能力和创新思维。
然而，科学教育中存在着性别差异，这在一定程度上影响了平等教育的实现。
本文将探讨科学教育中的性别差异，并提出一些解决方案来促进性别平等教育。
1. 性别差异的存在科学教育中的性别差异主要表现在学科选择、学习表现和社会认知等方面。
首先，女性学生在科学领域的学科选择上普遍偏少。
尽管在当前社会背景下，女性获得高等教育的机会比以往任何时候都要多，但在自然科学和工程技术等领域，女性学生的比例仍相对较低。
这可能与社会对女性的刻板印象以及传统性别角色的期望有关。
其次，男性学生在科学学科中的学习表现普遍优于女性学生。
研究表明，男性普遍对抽象概念和数学的处理能力较强，而女性在语言表达和细节观察方面相对较好。
这种差异可能导致现有的科学教育方法更适合男性学生，而对女性学生来说则存在一定程度的障碍。
最后，性别认知对科学教育产生了一定的影响。
学生在教育过程中容易受到性别角色刻板印象的影响，比如认为男性更擅长科学，而女性更适合从事文科等观念。
这些偏见不仅影响了学生的学科选择，还可能对他们对科学的兴趣和投入产生负面影响。
2. 促进性别平等教育的措施为了解决科学教育中的性别差异，并促进性别平等教育，需要采取一系列措施。
首先，学校和教育机构需要提供公平的学习机会和环境。
在科学教育中，学校应该通过提供性别平等的科学课程、实验室设备和资源，来减少性别差异对学生的影响。
此外，学校还应鼓励女性学生参与科学竞赛、实践项目和科学研究，提高她们在科学领域的参与度。
其次，科学教育方法需要更加关注学生的个体差异。
教师可以通过差异化教学的方式，针对男女学生的不同需求和学习特点，提供个性化的科学教育。
例如，教师可以采用多样化的教学策略，包括小组合作学习、问题解决和实验探究等，以激发女性学生对科学的兴趣和动力。
此外，还需要加强对学生的性别认知教育。
科学教育中的性别差异与反思在宽广的知识殿堂里，科学教育正如一朵绚丽的花朵，吸引着众多渴望探索的心灵。
然而，在这片花园中，性别差异的阴影却悄然存在，影响着无数年轻学子的成长与发展。
在这个花园里，男孩与女孩的身影交错而行，但她们的步伐却不尽相同。
男孩常常被鼓励去探索未知，以大胆的姿态投入实验室的海洋；而女孩则有时被期望温柔地关注细节，似乎更适合于安静的观察者角色。
这种潜移默化的性别期望悄然塑造着他们对科学的认知与热情。
在课堂上，教师的目光往往无意间更多地投向了表现活跃的男孩，而女孩的声音则可能在一旁被忽视。
这样的课堂氛围，仿佛无形的墙壁，将女孩与科学的亲密关系隔离开来。
在科学教育的过程中，教材也如同一面镜子，映射出社会对性别角色的刻板印象。
许多科学史上的伟大人物是男性，教材中常常强调他们的贡献，却鲜有提及女性科学家的成就。
这使得女孩在学习过程中常常感到自己的声音被湮没，她们看不到自己在科学领域的可能性。
这样的缺失不仅削弱了她们的自信心，也在潜意识中传递出“科学不是她们的领域”的信号。
然而，当阳光洒落在这片科学教育的土地上，反思的时刻来临。
教育者们开始意识到，打破性别界限、促进平等的必要性。
课堂上，教师需要更加关注每一个学生，无论性别如何，都应给予同样的支持与鼓励。
创造一个包容的环境，让女孩也能大胆表达自己的观点，参与讨论，成为探索者，而不仅仅是倾听者。
通过小组合作、项目研究等方式，让每个人都有机会展现自己的才华，激发他们对科学的热情。
与此同时，教材的编写也亟需改革。
在科学课程中，融入更多女性科学家的故事和成就，让女孩在学习过程中看到榜样的力量。
通过多样化的例子，展示科学的广泛性和包容性，女学生能够明白，科学不仅属于特定的群体，而是属于所有追求真理的人。
这样的改变不仅能激励女孩，也将帮助男孩理解性别平等的重要性，从而共同营造一个更加开放的科学教育环境。
此外，家庭的支持也至关重要。
家长们应当意识到，科学教育不仅是学校的责任，更是家庭共同参与的事业。
高中生地理学习的差异性研究
高中生地理学习的差异性主要受以下因素影响：
1. 性别：男女生在地理学习上存在一定的差异，以往研究表明男生更偏爱自然地理，而女生更偏爱人文地理。
2. 学习兴趣：学习兴趣对于高中生的地理学习有很大的影响。
对于对地理学感兴趣的学生，学习效果更好。
3. 学习能力：学习能力对高中生的地理学习有明显的影响。
智力水平高的学生更容易掌握地理知识，遇到问题也更能迅速解决。
4. 家庭教育背景：家庭教育背景的差异也会影响到学生对地理学习的理解和把握。
5. 教学方法：教学方法的不同会导致学生对地理学习的差异。
好的教学方法有助于吸引学生的兴趣，提高学习效果。
因此，教师在教学中应尽可能考虑到不同学生的差异，采用多样的教学方法，提供个性化的教育，帮助学生更好地理解和掌握地理学知识。
科学教育的性别差异和解决方法科学教育是培养学生科学素养和创新思维的重要途径，然而，在科学教育中存在着性别差异的问题。
女性学生往往在科学学科中表现出较低的参与度和兴趣，这对于促进性别平等和培养未来科学领域的人才显然是不利的。
因此，解决科学教育中的性别差异成为了一项紧迫的任务。
本文将探讨科学教育中存在的性别差异原因以及解决方法。
一、性别差异的原因科学教育中的性别差异可以归因于多种因素。
首先，社会文化因素是主要原因之一。
长期以来，社会普遍认为科学是男性的领域，女性在这方面的兴趣和能力被贬低或忽视。
这种刻板印象导致女性学生对科学教育的参与度较低。
其次，教学环境对性别差异也起到了一定的影响。
在科学课堂中，教师往往更加注重男性学生的参与和表现，忽视女性学生的存在和贡献。
这种偏见会让女性学生感到自卑和排斥，从而对科学教育失去兴趣。
另外，教学内容的性别偏向也是造成性别差异的原因之一。
在某些科学教材中，涉及到的案例和实验往往更加偏向男性的兴趣领域，这让女性学生感到难以产生共鸣，无法真正参与其中。
二、解决方法为了缩小科学教育中的性别差异，我们需要采取一系列的解决方法。
以下是几点参考建议：1. 打破性别刻板印象。
教育部门需要加强科学教育的宣传，让社会大众认识到科学并不仅仅是男性的专属领域。
同时，学校可以举办相关的科学活动和讲座，邀请成功的女性科学家分享自己的经验和故事，激发女性学生对科学的兴趣和热情。
2. 营造公平的教学环境。
教师需要重视女性学生的参与和贡献，平等对待每一位学生。
在课堂上，教师可以采用小组合作的方式，鼓励学生共同探索和发现科学知识，培养他们的团队合作和交流能力。
3. 优化教学内容。
教材编写者可以更加注重性别平等，选择更多女性相关的案例和实验，让女性学生能够更好地理解和参与其中。
同时，注重培养学生的科学思维和创新能力，将科学知识与生活实际相结合，使学生能够在科学探究中享受到乐趣和成就感。
4. 提供多样化的角色模型。
1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.751Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4689–4694Available online at AbstractThis study examined gender differences in 100 Pakistani high-school students’ attitudes towards science subjects, their perceptions of science and scientists, and their views about majoring in science. The study was also aimed to identify some of the factors underlying females’ under representation and low participation in science reported in previous research studies. Questionnaire developed by Miller, Blessing and Schwartz, 2006 was adapted for data collection. The questionnaire consisted of three parts. In its 1st part, a list of thirteen subjects being taught at matriculation level was given to choose from. In 2nd part, they were asked to name their favourite and what they liked most and least about that particular subject. Finally, they were asked five open ended questions regarding their college major and other matters related to science. Educational implications are also discussed.© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Keywords: Gender; attitude; physical sciences; biological sciences.1. IntroductionOur society is not yet on the stage where males and females could enjoy the equal status in the field of science (Darbyshire, 2009). Rosser and Lane (2002) authenticate this fact by highlighting four barriers to retaining female scientists and engineers: pressures women face in balancing career and family, problems faced by women because of low numbers and stereotypes held by others regarding gender, issues faced by both male and female scientists and engineers in the current environment of tight resources. The effect of these barriers is observable in underrepresentation of women in most areas of science and engineering. In 2006, more than half (53%) of psychology postdocs, 46% of social sciences postdocs, and 41% of biological sciences postdocs were women. Fewer than 25% of postdocs in computer sciences, engineering, mathematics, and physical sciences were women (NSF, 2008). The state of affairs is somewhat encouraging at lower levels as George (2000) discovered that students’ attitudes toward science generally decline over the middle and high school years. Despite the fact that women now* Shahida Sohail . Tel.: 0-423-7842850;E-mail address : s.sohail06@4690Hafi z Mohammad Iqbal et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4689–4694outnumber men on graduate courses, there continues to be a gender divide at higher academic levels with only 23% of women reaching the rank of professor (Flicker, as cited in Darbyshire, 2009) because of lower doctoral degrees received (NSF, 2008) and barriers faced by women scientists (Rosser & Lane, 2002). Osborne (2003) identified gender, personality, and structural variables and curriculum variables as factors influencing attitudes towards science. Of these the most significant is gender.One of the challenges of science attitude research is that many studies have been inconsistent in their results. Some researchers conclude that gender difference exists as far as attitude towards sciences is concerned (Lee, 1998; Osborne, 2003). Boys have a more positive attitude toward science than girls. Boys show significantly better attitudes regarding interest in science classes and activities in science classes, confidence in ability to do science, and interest in science-related activities outside of school (Ornstein, 2005). On the other hand, some researches reveal that there is no gender difference (Vrcelj & Krishnan, 2008; Penwell, 2004; Çokadar & Külge, 2008; Kögce, YÕldÕz, AydÕn, AltÕndag, 2009). Between these two extremes there are some researches which found that this difference varies with regard to some other variables. Iqbal, Nageen & Pell (2008) explored gender differences in attitudes towards science in urban and semi-urban locations and provided evidence of the potential of girls in the latter areas. Prokop, Tuncer and Chudá (2007) studied Slovak students’ attitude toward biology through six dimensions; interest, career, importance, teacher, equipment and difficulty and came across the gender difference among the students of grade 5-7 but not among 8-9 grade students. AkpÕnara, YÕldÕza, Tatarb and Ergina (2009) explored that there were significant differences between female and male students in terms of “interest in science” in favor of female. However there were no significant gender differences in terms of other factor “enjoyment of science”, “anxiety”, “enjoyment of science experiments” respectively.Literature depicts that students show different attitudes towards different science subjects. Polarization between life science and physical science courses in girls’ and boys’ choices for themselves respectively is clearly visible. Girls tend to select Biological Sciences whereas boys have a propensity to select Physical sciences (Cameron, 1989; Murphey & Whitelegg, 2006; NSB, 2002; NSF, 1999;Miller, Blessing, Schwartz, 2006). On analyzing the reasons given by students for opting particular science subject, it was observed that Physical sciences were mostly chosen for utilitarian reasons while personal interest was involved for choosing biological sciences (Cameron, 1989; Murphey et al., 2006). Other reasons for choosing science courses were attainment of expertise in their respective fields to further their education, to improve job skills (Vrcelj & Krishnan, 2008), interest in the subject, college course requirement and a variety of career ahead (Regan & Childs, 2003). Mothers of the students proved to be the individual who most influenced the students to choose a career in science, with fathers ranking as second most influential (Tompson, Rogers & Edeburn, 1999; Coyle, 2006). Literature recounts why girls choose not to pursue science even though they are both competent and believe in their capabilities to succeed. Osborne (2003) refers to the feminist perspective on this. Likewise, a lack of networking, role models, retention programs (Vrcelj & Krishnan, 2008), boring content, having no future relevance (Coyle, 2006), a gap between young girls’ desire to observe common scientific phenomena and their opportunities to do so (Kahle as cited in Osborne 2003) are some other causes of female under representation in science. To understand what influence this phenomenon has on students’ attitude towards science in Pakistan. This study is aimed at exploring the gender differences in high-school students’ visions concerning science. High school appears to be a critical time for science-related experiences. Because gender differences in interest in science are initially small in middle school, but become substantial during high school (Jones et al. as cited by Miller et al., 2006), it is important to focus on this period.2. Method2.1. Sample100 10th grade students were selected as sample from two pilot schools i.e. pilot school for girls and pilot school for boys. 50 girls and 50 boys constituted sample of the study. The students were enrolled in English medium science section. Questionnaires were given to them during their Physics class.Hafi z Mohammad Iqbal et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4689–469446912.2. Material and procedureThere were three parts of the questionnaire which was adapted with permission from the study of Miller et al. (2006) with the title “gender differences in high school: students’ views about science”. In its 1st part, a list of thirteen subjects being taught at matriculation level was given to choose from. Students were instructed to rank order the courses according to their choice. In 2nd part they were asked to name their favorite subject (which could have been out of the given list also) and what they liked most and least about that particular subject. Finally, they were asked five open ended questions regarding their college major and other matters related to science: (1) which major subject would you choose, when you enter college, (2) why would you decide to choose that particular subject, (3) would you consider science as major, why (or why not?), (4) more males than females tend to be scientists, if yes, why and (5) were males and females different in their study habits, thinking and learning styles?3. ResultsResults of all the questions are given below in the same order in which they were asked in the questionnaire. Table 1. Ranking of the subjects from the given listMathematics English Biology Physics/ Chemistry Others Males 20% 34% 2% 30% 12%Females 44% 30% 10% 0% 14%Urdu, Computer Sciences, Home Economics, History and Geography were not selected by even a single student. Females liked Mathematics more than males did when males liked English more. Females showed obvious preference for Biology whereas males did it for Physics and Chemistry. Fine Arts, Pakistan Studies and Islamiyat were not preferred by enough students to permit analysis.Table 2. Favorite SubjectBiology Mathematics Physics/ Chemistry Social SciencesEnglish Computer Sciences Male 14% 26% 24% 8%22% 4% Female 16% 44% 0% 6% 28% 4%Favorite subjects were sub divided into five groups for the sake of analysis: Biology, Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry, Social Sciences and English. A prominent gender difference was visible again for Mathematics and Physical Sciences (Physic and Chemistry). Females (44%) preferred Mathematics whereas males were the only who chose Physics and Chemistry which were not chosen by even a single female.Table 3. What liked most and least Liked mostLiked least Content Teacher Others Specific ContentTeacher No difficulty Others Male 68% 4% 26% 38%6% 40% 14% Female 70% 20% 6% 74% 0% 16% 8 % Two major factors seem to contribute prominently towards subject likeness: content and teacher. Males and females mentioned the first reason almost equally. They differed in their opinions of teacher as motivating force. A notable gender difference was found in response to last question when a great number of males (40%) mentioned no difficulty about the particular subject whereas most of the females (74%) found some particular content area difficult. Table 4. Anticipated majorBiology (doctor) Mathematics (Engineering) (Commerce)Computer Sciences Science Others Male 14% 36% 24%8% 10% 8% Female 40% 32% 0% 12% 4% 12%The responses were classified into five groups for the sake of analysis: Biology (pre medical), Mathematics (pre engineering), commerce (), Computer Sciences (ICS) and others. Females (40%) wanted to opt for Biology to enter the field of medicine more that males did. Contrary to that there was no significant difference as far as4692Hafi z Mohammad Iqbal et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4689–4694 Mathematics to enter the field of Engineering was concerned. Commerce was the field which was selected only by males. Overall, the best part of students (78 %) wanted to select science for further studies with higher number of female students (males=68%, female=88%).Table 5. Why the particular majorPersonal interest Career orientation Parents/ relatives Others Males 18% 56% 4% 20%Females 20% 56% 16% 6%Career orientation and personal interest were the major contributing factors for both the groups. No gender difference emerged in this case. Parents’/ relatives’ influence was relatively more on females.Table 6. Why or why not science majorScience not as major (m=15, f=6, t= 21) Science as major (m=35, f=44, t= 79) Difficult Low marks Lack of facilities No interest Personal interest Career orientation4% 4% 8% 22% 48% 14%MalesFemales 0% 0% 0% 12% 40% 48%boys selected Commerce. Foremost reasons for not majoring in science disclosed by males were difficult content, low marks, lack of facilities and no interest. Females (12%) in this category referred to disliking science.Table 7. More boys than girls tend to be scientistsIt’s not so No interest Wedding Social constraints Preferential treatment Males 18% 10% 0% 26% 32%Females 14% 22% 16% 28% 22%students irrespective of their gender agreed. Replying against why it was so, they explained the phenomenon in terms of females’ lack of interest in science, their responsibilities of married life, their domestic responsibilities even before marriage, social constraints and norms, lack of facilities especially for female education, males’ preferential treatment not only by parents but also by society, and males’ greater intelligence level (more curiosity, skill orientation and working capacity).Table 8. Mental differences between male and femalestylesboys careless intelligence aims environmentMales 30% 16% 14% 6% 4% 8% 8% Females 2% 58% 14% 10% 0% 8% 8%A great gender difference emerged when only one female opposite to fifteen males declared that there exists no mental difference. A great number of students (37%) mentioned them. They thought female students to be more careful, responsible, serious and emotional as compared to male students who were careless, irresponsible and tension free. 44% students mentioned differences in intelligence. Males were considered to be more curious as well. An equal number of students mentioned that females thought emotionally when males did it rationally.4. DiscussionThe present study is aimed at exploring the gender differences in interest, involvement and contribution in science in Pakistani perspective. Traditional extremes of physical sciences and biological sciences for males and females respectively have been observed in this study as well. High school females liked mathematics more than did males and there is no prominent difference in English as their favorite subject. The findings are inconsistent with that of previous researches which show that Mathematics is male dominant while English (Language and Literature) is a female dominant course (Miller et al., 2006; Du, Weymouth, & Dragseth, 2003). In addition, they more often planned to major in science in college, especially in the areas of biological sciences. Besides, the current studyHafi z Mohammad Iqbal et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4689–46944693 exposed some of the intricacies fundamental to these gender dissimilarities. It was surprising that no female mentioned science to be tough as boys did. So, science is no more a male dominant area. It is clearly indicated that what counts more while choosing a major are interest and future concern rather than ability, gender or self concept. Traditionally, students see only three major areas as helpful in selection of career path: biology for entering in medical field, mathematics for engineering and for commerce. Gender discrimination is prominently evident in medicine and commerce for males and females correspondingly. Not a single female decided to go for . It is also interesting to note that no students except one female wanted to enter the traditional teaching profession.As far as female scientists’ contribution to the scientific field is concerned, almost the same reasons of their lower partaking came forward which are mentioned by (Rosser & Lane, 2002). Besides, there is a societal image that expects boys to be more interested in science (Du, et al., 2003). These restrictions for girls and preferential treatment for boys makes girls less interested in involving in scientific field. It is a consensus among students that there are prominent personality differences which cause different attitudes towards science. Female students are more careful, responsible, serious and emotional as compared to male students who were careless, irresponsible and tension free. Du, et al. (2003) also declared the girls to be more engaged in school and classroom learning, hard worker and more recognized than boys. Summing up, it can be said that regarding attitude towards science, optimistic picture is appearing in Pakistan. Female students are enthusiastic, fervent and zealous towards selecting science areas. If they are facilitated properly, we can get a better partaking on their behalf which will ultimately flourish and enrich the field of science. Further research in this area may be done by taking comparatively large sample and including interviews for further exploration of the students’ views.ReferencesAkpÕnar, E., YÕldÕza, E., Tatar, N., & Ergin, Ö. (2009). Students’ attitudes toward science and technology: an investigation of gender, grade level, and academic achievement. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 2804–2808. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.498Cameron, R. (1989). Why boys and girls do (or don’t) choose science. The Australian Science Teachers Journal. 35(3) 111–112.Çokadar, H., & Külge, C. 2008. Pupils’ attitude towards science: A case of Turkey [Electronic version]. World Applied Sciences Journal, 3 (1), 102-109.Coyle, J. (2006). Why girls, in a single-sex school, study mathematical methods but not physics. Masters thesis. Deakin University. Darbyshire, J. (2009). Lost in darkness and distance: Why girls don't want to be scientists - and how the classroom might fix it. Retrieved November 21, 2009, from /article/523Du, Y., Weymouth, C. M., & Dragseth, K. (2003). Gender differences and student learning. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association at Chicago, April,21-25,2003.George, R. (2000). Measuring change in students' attitudes toward science over time: an application of latentvariable growth modeling[Electronic version]. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9(3).Iqbal, H. M., Nageen, T., & Pell, A. W. (2008). Attitudes to school science held by pimary children in Pakistan. Evaluation & Research in Education 21(4), 269- 302.doi: 10.1080/09500790802307829Kögce, D., YÕldÕz, C., AydÕn, M., & AltÕndag, R. (2009). Examining elementary school students’ attitudes towards mathematics in terms of some variables. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences ,1, 291–295. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.053Lee, J. D. (1998). Which kids can “become” scientists? Effects of gender, self-concepts, and perceptions of scientists [Electronic version].Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(3), 199–220.Miller, P. H., Blessing, J.S., Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender differences in high-school students' views about science [Electronic version].International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 363-381.Murphey, P., & Whitelegg, E. (2006). Girls in the physics classroom: a review of the research into the participation of girls in Physics. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from /activity/education/Making_a_Difference/Policy/file_6574.pdfNational Science Board. (2002). Science and engineering indicators, 1[Electronic version]. Arlington, VA.National Science Foundation. (1999). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1999[Electronic version].Arlington, VA: U.S. Government Printing Office.National Science Foundation. (2008). Female share of S&E postdoctoral fellows, by field: 1996 and 2006 [Electronic version]. (Division of Science Resources Statistics). Arlington, VA: U.S.A.Ornstein, A. (2005). The relationship between the frequency of hands-on experimentation and student attitudes toward science. PhD dissertation.Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, Connecticut.Osborne, J. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications [Electronic version]. International Journal of Science Education,25(9), 1049–1079.Penwell, R. (2004) Advanced placement environmental science: implications of gender and ethnicity [Electronic version]. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 8(3) 1-9.Prokop, P., Tuncer, G., & Chudá, J. (2007). Slovakian students’ attitudes toward biology [Electronic version]. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(4), 287-295.4694Hafi z Mohammad Iqbal et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4689–4694Rosser, S. V., & Lane, E. O. (2002). Key barriers for academic institutions seeking to retain female scientists and engineers: Family-unfriendly policies, low numbers, stereotypes, and harassment [Electronic version]. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8(2), 163–191.Thompson, B.R., Rogers, L., & Edebur, C. (1999). Gender equity in science. Retrieved November 25, 2009, from /files/Gender%20Equity%20in%20Science.pdfVrcelj, Z., & Krishnan, S. (2008). Gender differences in student attitudes toward engineering and academic careers. [Electronic version] Proceedings of the 2008 AaeE Conference, Yeppoon, 2008.。
