Konferensartikel

Artifacts for all and for each; boys and girls in technology schoolbooks: some precaution for the 21st century

Colette Andreucci
UMR P3 – ADEF, Aix-Marseille Universitå, IFE, France

M. Chatoney
UMR P3 – ADEF, Aix-Marseille Universitå, gestepro, France

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: PATT 26 Conference; Technology Education in the 21st Century; Stockholm; Sweden; 26-30 June; 2012

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 73:1, s. 11-21

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2012-06-18

ISBN: 978-91-7519-849-1

ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)

Abstract

For a long time; we have known that only a small part of female students chose technical or industrial carriers. Studies about this question have mainly focused on socio-cultural factors. The specific aspects about academic content remain less studied. We know nothing or very little about the issue of masculinity or femininity underlying knowledge and about material artifact used in teaching technology.

This contribution shows the content evolution of schoolbooks used in technology education and more precisely the neutrality or not of the artifacts that illustrate schoolbooks.

Nyckelord

Gender; technology education; artifacts; school book

Referenser

Andreucci; C.; Brandt Pomares; P.; Chatoney; M.; Ginestié; J. (2009). L’organisation des curricula d’éducation technologique dans différents pays européens : approche comparative et impact du point de vue du genre. Review of science; mathematics and ICT education; 63-84.

Caravita; S.; Valente; A.; Luzi; D.; Pace; P.; Kahlil; I.; Berthou; G.; Valanides; N.; Kozan- Naumescu; A.; Clément; P. (2008). Construction and validation of texbook analysis grids for ecology and environmental education. Science Education International; 19; 2; 97-116.

Castéras; J.; Clément; P.; Abrougui; M.; Sarapuu; T.;Turcinaviciene; J.; Aggoram; B.; Calado; F.;Bogner; F.; Nisiforou; O.; Valanides; N.; Carvalho; G. (2008).Genetic determinism in school texbooks; a comparative study conducted among 16 countries. Science Education International; 19; 2; 163-184.

Chatoney; M.; Andreucci; C. (2009). How study aids influence learning and motivation for girls in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education; 19(4); 393-402.

Duru-Bellat; M. (2005). L’école des filles; quelle formation pour quels rôles sociaux ? Paris: l’Harmatan.

Ginestié; J. (2005). Filles ou garçons; seuls ou à deux : Quelle influence sur les activités de production en éducation technologique ? Aster; 41; 217-241.

Jackson; D.; Rushton; J. (2006). Males have greater g: sex differences in general mental ability from 100 000 17-18 year olds on the scholastic assessment test; Intelligence; 34; 479-486.

Marry; C. (2004). Le sexe des études : permanence et changements; In M. Perrot; Quelle mixité pour l’école ?; Paris : Albin Michel; 37-46.

Baudelot C. & Mossuz-Laveau; J. (2004). Quand les femmes s’en mêlent. Genre et pouvoir. Paris : La Martiniére; 324-347.

Mosconi; N. (1994). Femmes et savoir. La société; l’école et la division sexuelle des savoirs. Paris : l’Harmattan.

Robine; F. (2006). Pourquoi les filles sont l’avenir de la science; Bulletin de l’Union des professeurs de physique et de chimie; 100; 421-436.

Rosenwald; F. (2006). Filles et garçons dans le système éducatif depuis vingt ans. In Données sociales. La société française; 2; 87- 93.

Roustan-Jalin Magali ; Ben Mim Hamadi ; Dupin J-J. (2002). Technologie; sciences; filles; garçons: des questions pour la didactique ? Didaskalia; 21; 9-42.

Sadker; D.; Silber; E. S. (2007). Gender in the Classroom: Foundations; Skills; Methods; and Strategies Across the Curriculum. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Wach; M. (1992). Projets et représentations des études et des professions des élèves de troisième et de terminale en 1992; L’Orientation scolaire et professionnelle; 21; 3; 297-339.

Citeringar i Crossref