Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism

Over the last decade, the “gender gap” in physics conceptual inventory scores has been extensively studied by the physics education research community. Researchers have identified many factors that influence the overall differences in post-test scores between men and women. More recently, it has bee...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rachel Henderson, John Stewart, Adrienne Traxler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: American Physical Society 2019-05-01
Series:Physical Review Physics Education Research
Online Access:http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010131
_version_ 1818927980135579648
author Rachel Henderson
John Stewart
Adrienne Traxler
author_facet Rachel Henderson
John Stewart
Adrienne Traxler
author_sort Rachel Henderson
collection DOAJ
description Over the last decade, the “gender gap” in physics conceptual inventory scores has been extensively studied by the physics education research community. Researchers have identified many factors that influence the overall differences in post-test scores between men and women. More recently, it has been shown that the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) contains eight items that are substantially unfair; six are unfair to women, two are unfair to men. The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE) and the Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM), however, contain fewer unfair items. In this work, results from prior studies are used to further explore the gender gap in five large samples of conceptual inventory data: the FCI (N_{1}=3663), the FMCE (N_{2}=2551, N_{3}=3719), and the CSEM (N_{4}=1767, N_{5}=2439). The gender gap in these samples is partitioned into four components: the gender gap resulting from the student’s academic performance, the gender gap resulting from prior preparation in physics, the gender gap resulting from instrumental fairness, and the gender gap of students with equal academic performance and physics preparation on the fair instrument. For all samples, very little of the gender gap was explained by differences in academic performance between men and women, measured by ACT or SAT math percentile scores or physics test average. The percentage of the gender gap resulting from instrumental fairness varied across samples from 30% in the FCI to 2% to 6% in the CSEM. A substantial part of the gender gap in four of the five samples (30%–40%) was explained by differences in prior physics preparation, measured by pretest scores on the conceptual inventories. Further correcting for conceptual physics prior preparation using the post-test score in the previous class reduced gender differences substantially.
first_indexed 2024-12-20T03:21:34Z
format Article
id doaj.art-cf515de2cbef44ca90dfc744c4e45d8f
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2469-9896
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-20T03:21:34Z
publishDate 2019-05-01
publisher American Physical Society
record_format Article
series Physical Review Physics Education Research
spelling doaj.art-cf515de2cbef44ca90dfc744c4e45d8f2022-12-21T19:55:12ZengAmerican Physical SocietyPhysical Review Physics Education Research2469-98962019-05-0115101013110.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010131Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and MagnetismRachel HendersonJohn StewartAdrienne TraxlerOver the last decade, the “gender gap” in physics conceptual inventory scores has been extensively studied by the physics education research community. Researchers have identified many factors that influence the overall differences in post-test scores between men and women. More recently, it has been shown that the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) contains eight items that are substantially unfair; six are unfair to women, two are unfair to men. The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE) and the Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM), however, contain fewer unfair items. In this work, results from prior studies are used to further explore the gender gap in five large samples of conceptual inventory data: the FCI (N_{1}=3663), the FMCE (N_{2}=2551, N_{3}=3719), and the CSEM (N_{4}=1767, N_{5}=2439). The gender gap in these samples is partitioned into four components: the gender gap resulting from the student’s academic performance, the gender gap resulting from prior preparation in physics, the gender gap resulting from instrumental fairness, and the gender gap of students with equal academic performance and physics preparation on the fair instrument. For all samples, very little of the gender gap was explained by differences in academic performance between men and women, measured by ACT or SAT math percentile scores or physics test average. The percentage of the gender gap resulting from instrumental fairness varied across samples from 30% in the FCI to 2% to 6% in the CSEM. A substantial part of the gender gap in four of the five samples (30%–40%) was explained by differences in prior physics preparation, measured by pretest scores on the conceptual inventories. Further correcting for conceptual physics prior preparation using the post-test score in the previous class reduced gender differences substantially.http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010131
spellingShingle Rachel Henderson
John Stewart
Adrienne Traxler
Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
Physical Review Physics Education Research
title Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
title_full Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
title_fullStr Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
title_full_unstemmed Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
title_short Partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories: Force Concept Inventory, Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
title_sort partitioning the gender gap in physics conceptual inventories force concept inventory force and motion conceptual evaluation and conceptual survey of electricity and magnetism
url http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010131
work_keys_str_mv AT rachelhenderson partitioningthegendergapinphysicsconceptualinventoriesforceconceptinventoryforceandmotionconceptualevaluationandconceptualsurveyofelectricityandmagnetism
AT johnstewart partitioningthegendergapinphysicsconceptualinventoriesforceconceptinventoryforceandmotionconceptualevaluationandconceptualsurveyofelectricityandmagnetism
AT adriennetraxler partitioningthegendergapinphysicsconceptualinventoriesforceconceptinventoryforceandmotionconceptualevaluationandconceptualsurveyofelectricityandmagnetism