Who and what gets recognized in peer recognition

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Physical Review Physics Education Research Pub Date : 2024-04-15 DOI:10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010127
Meagan Sundstrom, L. N. Simpfendoerfer, Annie Tan, Ashley B. Heim, N. G. Holmes
{"title":"Who and what gets recognized in peer recognition","authors":"Meagan Sundstrom, L. N. Simpfendoerfer, Annie Tan, Ashley B. Heim, N. G. Holmes","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous work has identified that recognition from others is an important predictor of students’ participation, persistence, and career intentions in physics. However, research has also found a gender bias in peer recognition in which student nominations of strong peers in their physics course disproportionately favor men over women. In this study, we draw on methods from social network analysis and find a consistent gender bias in which men disproportionately undernominate women as strong in their physics course in two offerings of both a lecture course (for science and engineering, but not physics, majors) and a distinct lab course (for science, engineering, and physics majors). We also find in one offering of the lecture course that women disproportionately undernominate men, contrary to what previous research would predict. We expand on prior work by also probing two data sources related to who and what gets recognized in peer recognition: students’ interactions with their peers (who gets recognized) and students’ written explanations of their nominations of strong peers (what gets recognized). Results suggest that the nature of the observed gender bias in peer recognition varies between the instructional contexts of lecture and lab. In the lecture course, the gender bias is related to who gets recognized: both men and women disproportionately overnominate their interaction ties to students of their same gender as strong in the course. In the lab course, the gender bias is also related to what gets recognized: men nominate men more than women because of skills related to interactions, such as being helpful. These findings illuminate the different ways in which students form perceptions of their peers and add nuance to our understanding of the nature of gender bias in peer recognition.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"81 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010127","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous work has identified that recognition from others is an important predictor of students’ participation, persistence, and career intentions in physics. However, research has also found a gender bias in peer recognition in which student nominations of strong peers in their physics course disproportionately favor men over women. In this study, we draw on methods from social network analysis and find a consistent gender bias in which men disproportionately undernominate women as strong in their physics course in two offerings of both a lecture course (for science and engineering, but not physics, majors) and a distinct lab course (for science, engineering, and physics majors). We also find in one offering of the lecture course that women disproportionately undernominate men, contrary to what previous research would predict. We expand on prior work by also probing two data sources related to who and what gets recognized in peer recognition: students’ interactions with their peers (who gets recognized) and students’ written explanations of their nominations of strong peers (what gets recognized). Results suggest that the nature of the observed gender bias in peer recognition varies between the instructional contexts of lecture and lab. In the lecture course, the gender bias is related to who gets recognized: both men and women disproportionately overnominate their interaction ties to students of their same gender as strong in the course. In the lab course, the gender bias is also related to what gets recognized: men nominate men more than women because of skills related to interactions, such as being helpful. These findings illuminate the different ways in which students form perceptions of their peers and add nuance to our understanding of the nature of gender bias in peer recognition.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
同行表彰的对象和内容
以往的研究发现,他人的认可是预测学生参与、坚持学习物理以及职业意向的重要因素。然而,研究也发现了同伴认可中的性别偏差,即学生在物理课程中对强势同伴的提名偏向于男性而非女性。在本研究中,我们借鉴了社会网络分析的方法,发现在两门授课课程(针对理工科专业,但非物理专业)和一门实验课程(针对理工科和物理专业)中,存在着一致的性别偏见,即男生过多地不提名女生为物理课程中的强者。我们还发现,在一门讲授课程中,女性的比例远远低于男性,这与以往研究的预测相反。在先前工作的基础上,我们还探究了与同伴认可中的认可对象和认可内容相关的两个数据来源:学生与同伴的互动(认可对象)和学生对其提名的强势同伴的书面解释(认可内容)。结果表明,在授课和实验两种教学情境中,观察到的同伴认可中的性别偏见的性质各不相同。在讲授课程中,性别偏见与谁被认可有关:男性和女性都过多地提名他们与同性学生的互动关系为课程中的强者。在实验课程中,性别偏差也与被认可的内容有关:由于与互动有关的技能(如乐于助人),男性比女性更多地提名男性。这些发现揭示了学生形成同伴认知的不同方式,使我们对同伴认可中性别偏见的本质有了更细致的了解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Physical Review Physics Education Research
Physical Review Physics Education Research Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
41.90%
发文量
84
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊介绍: PRPER covers all educational levels, from elementary through graduate education. All topics in experimental and theoretical physics education research are accepted, including, but not limited to: Educational policy Instructional strategies, and materials development Research methodology Epistemology, attitudes, and beliefs Learning environment Scientific reasoning and problem solving Diversity and inclusion Learning theory Student participation Faculty and teacher professional development
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Development and validation of a conceptual multiple-choice survey instrument to assess student understanding of introductory thermodynamics [Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020112 (2023)] Reinforcing mindware or supporting cognitive reflection: Testing two strategies for addressing a persistent learning challenge in the context of air resistance How women and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer physics doctoral students navigate graduate education: The roles of professional environments and social networks Evolving study strategies and support structures of introductory physics students Effectiveness of conceptual-framework-based instruction on promoting knowledge integration in learning simple electric circuit
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1