IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/voprob/2021i3p91-113.html

Math Is Not for Girl? Investigating the Impact of e-Learning Platforms on the Development of Growth Mindsets in Elementary Classrooms

Author

Abstract

Valeria Ershova, Master's Student, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: vsershova@edu.hse.ru Iuliia Gerasimova, Research Intern, International Laboratory for Evaluation of Practices and Innovations in Education, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: ygerasimova@hse.ru (corresponding author) Anastasia Kapuza, Research Fellow, International Laboratory for Evaluation of Practices and Innovations in Education, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: akapuza@hse.ru Address: Bld. 10, 16 Potapovsky Ln, 101000 Moscow, Russian Federation. Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education research indicates a gender gap in how students perceive their mathematical ability. Even when there are no gender disparities in math achievement, girls tend to have lower expectations of success and lower self-reported proficiency in the subject than boys. Empirical findings show that development of growth mindset could bridge the gender gap in students' perceptions of their mathematical ability and enhance girls' interest in math. Formative feedback is one of the possible tools to foster the development of growth mindsets. This study investigates the impact of an e-learning platform with automated feedback on the development of growth mindsets in elementary school children. Empirical data was collected during an experiment which involved 6,300 third grade students from 343 regional schools in Russia. Statistically significant differences were revealed between students in the control group and those who used the e-learning platform (experimental group). However, the effects of using the platform were significantly lower for girls than boys. The results obtained in this study point to the great potential of e-learning platforms with instant feedback in fostering growth mindsets in mathematics among elementary school children. Furthermore, it appears vital to integrate tailored feedback for boys and girls to mitigate gender differences in school math education.

Suggested Citation

  • Valeriya Ershova & Iuliia Gerasimova & Anastasia Kapuza, 2021. "Math Is Not for Girl? Investigating the Impact of e-Learning Platforms on the Development of Growth Mindsets in Elementary Classrooms," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 91-113.
    • Handle: RePEc:nos:voprob:2021:i:3:p:91-113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://vo.hse.ru/data/2021/09/21/1474220101/%D0%95%D1%80%D1%88%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0,%20%D0%93%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0,%20%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BF%D1%83%D0%B7%D0%B0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roland G. Fryer & Steven D. Levitt, 2010. "An Empirical Analysis of the Gender Gap in Mathematics," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 210-240, April.
    2. Natalia Nollenberger & Núria Rodríguez-Planas & Almudena Sevilla, 2016. "The Math Gender Gap: The Role of Culture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 257-261, May.
    3. Zingoni, Matt & Byron, Kris, 2017. "How beliefs about the self influence perceptions of negative feedback and subsequent effort and learning," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 50-62.
    4. Rajagopal, 2014. "The Human Factors," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 9, pages 225-249, Palgrave Macmillan.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ершова В. С. & Герасимова Ю. О. & Капуза А. В., 2021. "Математика Не Для Девочек? Исследование Влияния Образовательных Платформ На Развитие Мышления Роста Младших Школьников," Вопросы образования // Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 91-113.
    2. Gevrek, Z. Eylem & Gevrek, Deniz & Neumeier, Christian, 2020. "Explaining the gender gaps in mathematics achievement and attitudes: The role of societal gender equality," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Shulamit Kahn & Donna Ginther, 2017. "Women and STEM," NBER Working Papers 23525, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Aldén, Lina & Neuman, Emma, 2022. "Culture and the gender gap in choice of major: An analysis using sibling comparisons," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 346-373.
    5. González, Libertad & Rodríguez-Planas, Núria, 2020. "Gender norms and intimate partner violence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 223-248.
    6. Anghel, Brindusa & Rodríguez-Planas, Núria & Sanz-de-Galdeano, Anna, 2019. "Culture, Gender, and Math: A Revisitation," IZA Discussion Papers 12371, IZA Network @ LISER.
    7. Paterson, Molly & Parasnis, Jaai & Rendall, Michelle, 2022. "Gender, Income, and Numeracy Test Scores," CEPR Discussion Papers 16895, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Michela Carlana, 2019. "Implicit Stereotypes: Evidence from Teachers’ Gender Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1163-1224.
    9. Paterson, Molly & Parasnis, Jaai & Rendall, Michelle, 2024. "Gender, socioeconomic status, and numeracy test scores," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    10. Shelly Lundberg, 2020. "Educational gender gaps," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(2), pages 416-439, October.
    11. Dossi, Gaia & Figlio, David & Giuliano, Paola & Sapienza, Paola, 2021. "Born in the family: Preferences for boys and the gender gap in math," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 175-188.
    12. Friedman-Sokuler, Naomi & Justman, Moshe, 2020. "Gender, culture and STEM: Counter-intuitive patterns in Arab society," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    13. Lippmann, Quentin & Senik, Claudia, 2018. "Math, girls and socialism," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 874-888.
    14. Farzana Munir & Rudolf Winter-Ebmer, 2018. "Decomposing international gender test score differences," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 52(1), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Anne (A.C.) Gielen & Esmee Zwiers, 2018. "Biology and the gender gap in educational performance - The role of prenatal testosterone in test scores," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-086/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Rakshit, Sonali & Sahoo, Soham, 2023. "Biased teachers and gender gap in learning outcomes: Evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Kawaguchi, Daiji & Toriyabe, Takahiro, 2022. "Measurements of skill and skill-use using PIAAC," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. Muñoz, Juan Sebastián, 2018. "The economics behind the math gender gap: Colombian evidence on the role of sample selection," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 368-391.
    19. Sara Moricz, 2019. "Using Artificial Intelligence to Recapture Norms: Did #metoo change gender norms in Sweden?," Papers 1903.00690, arXiv.org.
    20. Hamid NOGHANIBEHAMBARI & Nahid TAVASSOLI & Farzaneh NOGHANI, 2020. "Intergenerational transmission of culture among immigrants: Gender gap in education among first and second generations," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, EconSciences Journals, vol. 7(4), pages 284-318, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nos:voprob:2021:i:3:p:91-113. 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: Marta Morozova (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vo.hse.ru/en/ .

    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.