IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p4994-d546105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Introducing and Evaluating the Effective Inclusion of Gender Dimension in STEM Higher Education

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Peña

    (Department of Mathematics, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Noelia Olmedo-Torre

    (Department of Graphic and Design Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Elisabet Mas de les Valls

    (Department of Physics, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Amaia Lusa

    (Department of Management, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

The need to incorporate the gender dimension in higher education is a central element of gender equality policies within the European Union (EU). When most institutions of higher education have already strengthened and consolidated their curricula, the next challenge is to include and ensure that all people have the same opportunities to progress in education. This study intends to incorporate the gender dimension in teaching through a guide providing recommendations for the introduction of changes that will allow its effective incorporation in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) areas. It will take into account the administration in charge of formulating policies in the field of education, the students, and, mainly, the teaching staff. Its objective is to cover aspects related to the principles of equal opportunities and gender equality in STEM higher education disciplines. For this purpose, 41 volunteer teachers from 8 degrees and master’s degrees from the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya in Spain participated. To achieve the results of this study, aspects related to social and gender relevance of the subjects, inclusive methodology, classroom management and assessment were considered. As a preliminary step to the development of the guide of recommendations, a teacher’s self-assessment tool and a questionnaire for students to analyze the perception of the gender dimension were developed.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Peña & Noelia Olmedo-Torre & Elisabet Mas de les Valls & Amaia Lusa, 2021. "Introducing and Evaluating the Effective Inclusion of Gender Dimension in STEM Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-26, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:4994-:d:546105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4994/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4994/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friederike Mengel & Jan Sauermann & Ulf Zölitz, 2019. "Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 535-566.
    2. Beleche, Trinidad & Fairris, David & Marks, Mindy, 2012. "Do course evaluations truly reflect student learning? Evidence from an objectively graded post-test," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 709-719.
    3. Xaro Benavent & Esther de Ves & Anabel Forte & Carmen Botella-Mascarell & Emilia López-Iñesta & Silvia Rueda & Sandra Roger & Joaquin Perez & Cristina Portalés & Esther Dura & Daniel Garcia-Costa & Pa, 2020. "Girls4STEM: Gender Diversity in STEM for a Sustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Riener, Gerhard & Wagner, Valentin, 2017. "Shying away from demanding tasks? Experimental evidence on gender differences in answering multiple-choice questions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 43-62.
    5. Pekkarinen, Tuomas, 2015. "Gender differences in behaviour under competitive pressure: Evidence on omission patterns in university entrance examinations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 94-110.
    6. Holly E. Tatum & Beth M. Schwartz & Peggy A. Schimmoeller & Nicole Perry, 2013. "Classroom Participation and Student-Faculty Interactions: Does Gender Matter?," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(6), pages 745-768, November.
    7. Campbell, Rosie & Childs, Sarah & Lovenduski, Joni, 2010. "Do Women Need Women Representatives?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 171-194, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cristina Miralles-Cardona & Ioanna Kitta & María-Cristina Cardona-Moltó, 2023. "Exploring Pre-Service STEM Teachers’ Capacity to Teach Using a Gender-Responsive Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-21, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anaya, Lina & Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro & Zamarro, Gema, 2022. "Understanding performance in test taking: The role of question difficulty order," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Jef Vanderoost & Rianne Janssen & Jan Eggermont & Riet Callens & Tinne De Laet, 2018. "Elimination testing with adapted scoring reduces guessing and anxiety in multiple-choice assessments, but does not increase grade average in comparison with negative marking," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-27, October.
    3. Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2021. "Brave boys and play-it-safe girls: Gender differences in willingness to guess in a large scale natural field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Margaretha Buurman & Josse (J.) Delfgaauw & Robert (A.J.) Dur & Robin Zoutenbier, 2018. "The Effects of Student Feedback to teachers: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-042/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Buurman, Margaretha & Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert & Zoutenbier, Robin, 2020. "When do teachers respond to student feedback? Evidence from a field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. Riener, Gerhard & Wagner, Valentin, 2018. "Gender differences in willingness to compete and answering multiple-choice questions—The role of age," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 86-89.
    7. Montolio, Daniel & Taberner, Pere A., 2021. "Gender differences under test pressure and their impact on academic performance: A quasi-experimental design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 1065-1090.
    8. Claire Duquennois, 2022. "Fictional Money, Real Costs: Impacts of Financial Salience on Disadvantaged Students," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(3), pages 798-826, March.
    9. Maddalena Davoli, 2023. "A, B, or C? Question Format and the Gender Gap in Financial Literacy," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0206, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    10. Bottazzi, Laura & Lusardi, Annamaria, 2021. "Stereotypes in financial literacy: Evidence from PISA," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    11. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    12. Scott E. Carrell & Michal Kurlaender, 2023. "My Professor Cares: Experimental Evidence on the Role of Faculty Engagement," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 113-141, November.
    13. Sarah Shandera & Jes L Matsick & David R Hunter & Louis Leblond, 2021. "RASE: Modeling cumulative disadvantage due to marginalized group status in academia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Maria Sousa Galito, 2018. "Women in Politics - Portugal as Case Study," CEsA Working Papers 173, CEsA - Center for African and Development Studies.
    15. Ana Jesús López & Dolores Pereira, 2021. "The Value of Transfer of Knowledge in Bridging the Gender Gap in STEM," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Ayllón, Sara, 2022. "Online teaching and gender bias," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    17. Boring, Anne & Philippe, Arnaud, 2021. "Reducing discrimination in the field: Evidence from an awareness raising intervention targeting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    18. Dakota Murray & Clara Boothby & Huimeng Zhao & Vanessa Minik & Nicolas Bérubé & Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R Sugimoto, 2020. "Exploring the personal and professional factors associated with student evaluations of tenure-track faculty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, June.
    19. Iriberri, Nagore & Funk, Patricia & Savio, Giulia, 2022. "Does Scarcity of Female Instructors Create Demand for Diversity among Students? Evidence from an M-Turk Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 14190, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Qian Wu & Monique Vanerum & Anouk Agten & Andrés Christiansen & Frank Vandenabeele & Jean-Michel Rigo & Rianne Janssen, 2021. "Certainty-Based Marking on Multiple-Choice Items: Psychometrics Meets Decision Theory," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 518-543, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:4994-:d:546105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.