Luis A. Leyva, Ruby Quea, Keith Weber, Dan Battey, D. Lopez
{"title":"Detailing Racialized and Gendered Mechanisms of Undergraduate Precalculus and Calculus Classroom Instruction","authors":"Luis A. Leyva, Ruby Quea, Keith Weber, Dan Battey, D. Lopez","doi":"10.1080/07370008.2020.1849218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Undergraduate mathematics education can be experienced in discouraging and marginalizing ways among Black students, Latin* students, and white women. Precalculus and calculus courses, in particular, operate as gatekeepers that contribute to racialized and gendered attrition in persistence with mathematics coursework and pursuits in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). However, student perceptions of instruction in these introductory mathematics courses have yet to be systematically examined as a contributor to such attrition. This paper presents findings from a study of 20 historically marginalized students’ perceptions of precalculus and calculus instruction to document features that they found discouraging and marginalizing. Our analysis revealed how students across different race-gender identities reported stereotyping as well as issues of representation in introductory mathematics classrooms and STEM fields as shaping their perceptions of instruction. These perceptions pointed to the operation of three racialized and gendered mechanisms in instruction: (i) creating differential opportunities for participation and support, (ii) limiting support from same-race, same-gender peers to manage negativity in instruction, and (iii) activating exclusionary ideas about who belongs in STEM fields. We draw on our findings to raise implications for research and practice in undergraduate mathematics education.","PeriodicalId":47945,"journal":{"name":"Cognition and Instruction","volume":"39 1","pages":"1 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07370008.2020.1849218","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1849218","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29
Abstract
Abstract Undergraduate mathematics education can be experienced in discouraging and marginalizing ways among Black students, Latin* students, and white women. Precalculus and calculus courses, in particular, operate as gatekeepers that contribute to racialized and gendered attrition in persistence with mathematics coursework and pursuits in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). However, student perceptions of instruction in these introductory mathematics courses have yet to be systematically examined as a contributor to such attrition. This paper presents findings from a study of 20 historically marginalized students’ perceptions of precalculus and calculus instruction to document features that they found discouraging and marginalizing. Our analysis revealed how students across different race-gender identities reported stereotyping as well as issues of representation in introductory mathematics classrooms and STEM fields as shaping their perceptions of instruction. These perceptions pointed to the operation of three racialized and gendered mechanisms in instruction: (i) creating differential opportunities for participation and support, (ii) limiting support from same-race, same-gender peers to manage negativity in instruction, and (iii) activating exclusionary ideas about who belongs in STEM fields. We draw on our findings to raise implications for research and practice in undergraduate mathematics education.
期刊介绍:
Among education journals, Cognition and Instruction"s distinctive niche is rigorous study of foundational issues concerning the mental, socio-cultural, and mediational processes and conditions of learning and intellectual competence. For these purposes, both “cognition” and “instruction” must be interpreted broadly. The journal preferentially attends to the “how” of learning and intellectual practices. A balance of well-reasoned theory and careful and reflective empirical technique is typical.