How Do Pre-Service Primary School Teachers Evaluate Gender Equality in Primary School Science Textbooks?

Abstract

Textbooks play a key role in shaping students' images of society and its actors. Based on the importance of this active role, in this study, third and fourth grade primary school science textbooks were examined in terms of gender equality by female pre-service primary school teachers who will become the practitioners using these textbooks. Thus, this research aims at revealing the experiences of pre-service primary school teachers based on their examination of primary school science textbooks and the evaluations used in their textbook reviews. The research was conducted using a phenomenology research design in the context of a qualitative method. Ten female pre-service primary school teachers participated in the study, which lasted seven weeks, and the data were collected through a textbook review report and a semi-structured interview form. A content analysis method was used to assess the data. The results of the study were discussed within the framework of five main themes: gender distribution, gender roles and stereotypes, the role of the teacher, the role of the textbooks, and science textbook evaluation tendencies. Suggestions were made based on these reviews.

Keywords

• Gender equality
• Primary school science textbooks
• Textbook review

References

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Myers, J. Y., Summers, R., Brunner, J., Waight, N., Wahbeh, N., ... & Belarmino, J. (2017). A longitudinal analysis of the extent and manner of representations of nature of science in US high school biology and physics textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(1), 82-120. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21339
2. Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C. A., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Early childhood teachers' views of nature of science: The influence of intellectual levels, cultural values, and explicit reflective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 748-770. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20236
3. Anderson, D. A., & Hamilton, M. (2005). Gender role stereotyping of parents in children’s picture books: The invisible father. Sex roles, 52, 145-151. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11199-005-1290-8
4. Aragonés-González, M., Rosser-Limiñana, A., & Gil-González, D. (2020). Coeducation and gender equality in education systems: A scoping review. Children and youth services review, 111, 104837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104837
5. Arastaman, G., Fidan, İ. Ö., & Fidan, T. (2018). Nitel araştırmada geçerlik ve güvenirlik: Kuramsal bir inceleme. [Validity and Reliability In Qualitative Research: A Theoretical Analysis]. YYU Journal of Education Faculty, 15(1), 37-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.23891/efdyyu.2018.61
6. Arslan Ozer, D., Karatas, Z. & Ergun, O. R. (2019). Analysis of Gender Roles in Primary School (1st to 4th Grade) Turkish Textbooks. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 19 (79), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2019.79.1
7. Atay, M., & Danju, I. (2012). Analysis of 1st grade and 5th grade textbooks and primary school student's views about personal traits in gender role in society. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.614
8. Baker, C., Wuest, J., & Stern, P. N. (1992). Method slurring: The grounded theory/phenomenology example. Journal of advanced nursing, 17(11), 1355-1360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01859.x

9. Bakırcı, H. & Ocsoy, K. (2017). An Investigation of the Activities in Science Textbooks in terms of the Concept of Entrepreneurship. Adıyaman University Journal of Educational Sciences, 7 (2), 256-276. https://doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.322438
10. Başaran, M. (2019). Sosyal bilgiler öğretim programı ve ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği eğitimi [Gender Equality Education in Social Studies Curriculum and Textbooks]. [Doctoral Dissertation]. Necmettin Erbakan University. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2609708658?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
11. Bilgin, S. (2019). Ortaokul sosyal bilgiler ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet. [Gender ın secondary schools socıal studıes textbook]. [Master's thesis].Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi. http://libra.omu.edu.tr/tezler/127328.pdf
12. Blumberg, R.L. (2008). The invisible obstacle to educational equality: gender bias in textbooks. Prospects 38, 345–361 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-009-9086-1
13. Brito, A., Rodriguez, M. A., & Niaz, M. (2005). A reconstruction of development of the periodic table based on history and philosophy of science and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 84-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20044
14. Chick, K.A. (2006). Gender balance in k-12 american history textbooks. Social Studies Research and Practice, 1(3), pp. 284-290. https://doi.org/10.1108/SSRP-03-2006-B0001
15. Chisholm, L. (2018). Representations of Class, Race, and Gender in Textbooks. In: Fuchs, E., Bock, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Textbook Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-53142-1_16
16. Chua, J. X., Tan, A. L., & Ramnarain, U. (2019). Representation of NOS aspects across chapters in Singapore Grade 9 and 10 Biology textbooks: insights for improving NOS representation. Research in Science & Technological Education, 37(3), 259-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1542377
17. Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Çapar, M. C., & Ceylan, M. (2022). Durum çalışması ve olgubilim desenlerinin karşılaştırılması. [A Comparison of Case Study and Phenomenology Design]. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 22 (Özel Sayı 2), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.1227359
19. Çatalcalı Soyer, A. (2009). Okul Öncesi Dönem Çocuk Hikâye Kitapları: Stereotipler ve Kimlikler [Storybooks of the Pre- School Kids: Sterotypes and Identities]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 1(1), 13-27. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/makusobed/issue/19433/206637
20. De Kraker-Pauw, E., Van Wesel, F., Verwijmeren, T., Denessen, E., & Krabbendam, L. (2016). Are teacher beliefs gender-related?. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 333-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.040
21. Delamont, S. (2012). Sex roles and the school. Routledge .
22. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage.
23. Demircioğlu, E., & Özalp, M. T. (2022). Representation of female scientists in social studies textbooks. Educational Academic Research, 47, 80-92. https://doi.org/10.5152/AUJKKEF.2022.991680
24. Dökmen, Z. Y. (2015). Toplumsal cinsiyet: Sosyal psikolojik açıklamalar. [Gender: social psychological explanations] (6. Baskı), Remzi Kitabevi, İstanbul.
25. Duruk, Ü. & Akgün, A. (2020). Bilimin Doğası Bileşenlerinin Fen Bilimleri Ders Kitaplarında Temsil Edilme Durumu. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9 (2), 196-229. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/amauefd/issue/58078/721309
26. Dündar, S. (2021). Ortaokul sosyal bilgiler ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet. [Gender ın secondary schools socıal studıes textbook]. [Master's thesis]. Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi. http://adudspace.adu.edu.tr:8080/jspui/bitstream/11607/4519/1/3153.pdf
27. Evans, L., Davies, K. No Sissy Boys Here: A Content Analysis of the Representation of Masculinity in Elementary School Reading Textbooks. Sex Roles 42, 255–270 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007043323906
28. Erikli, S. (2020). Çalışma yaşamında toplumsal cinsiyet ayrımcılığının görünümü. [Gender Discrimination in Working Life]. Hacettepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 2 (1), 39-60. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/husbdergi/issue/52731/673563
29. Eroğlu Doğan, E., Ekinci, R. & Doğan, D. (2020). Fen bilimleri ders kitapları ile ilgili yapılan çalışmaların incelenmesi [Examination of the studies related to science textbooks]. Journal of the Human and Social Science Researches, 9 (5), 3479-3499. https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.734864
30. Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1998). Okuryazarlık, çev. Ayhan, S., İmge, Ankara
31. Glesne, C. (2012). Nitel arastirmaya giris. Trans. Eds.: Ali Ersoy, PelinYalcinoglu). 4th Edition. Ankara: Ani Publishing.
32. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ectj, 29(2), 75-91.
33. Gümüşoğlu, F. (2008). Ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet. [Gender in school text books]. Toplum ve Demokrasi Dergisi, 2(4), 39-50. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/toplumdd/issue/22728/242599
34. Güvenli, G., & Tanrıöver, H. U. (2009). Ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet. Tüzün (Editör). Ders kitaplarında İnsan hakları II tarama sonuçları. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 97-114.
35. Groenewald, T. (2004). A Phenomenological Research Design Illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300104
36. Hand, S., Rice, L. & Greenlee, E. (2017). Exploring teachers’ and students’ gender role bias and students’ confidence in STEM fields. Soc Psychol Educ 20, 929–945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9408-8
37. Helvacıoğlu, F. (1996). Ders kitaplarında cinsiyetçilik [Sexism in textbooks]. İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları.
38. Jackson, C., & Warin, J. (2000). The importance of gender as an aspect of identity at key transition points in compulsory education. British educational research journal, 26(3), 375-391. https://doi.org/10.1080/713651558
39. Jassey, I. A. (1998). Gender in elementary school texts. Japan Quarterly, 45(1), 87. https://www.proquest.com/openview/cec7f9ac7196dafe3cc7f9f3051fe208/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=48231
40. Karamustafaoğlu, O., & Üstün, A. (2004). Yürürlükteki fen bilgisi 7. sınıf ders kitabının incelenmesi. XIII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayı, 6-9.
41. Kükrer, M. & Kıbrıs, İ. (2017). CEDAW öncesi ve sonrası ortaokul türkçe ders kitaplarında yer alan toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği faktörünün değerlendirilmesi [The evaluatıon of socıal gender equalıty factor ın the secondary school turkısh textbooks before and after CEDAW]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (3), 1369-1383. http://dx.doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2017.17.31178-338836
42. Law, K. W. K., & Chan, A. H. (2004). Gender role stereotyping in Hong Kong's primary school Chinese language subject textbooks. Asian journal of women's studies, 10(1), 49-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/12259276.2004.11665965
43. Lee, J. F., & Collins, P. (2009). Australian English‐language textbooks: the gender issues. Gender and education, 21(4), 353-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250802392257
44. Lee, J. F. (2018). Gender representation in Japanese EFL textbooks–a corpus study. Gender and Education, 30(3), 379-395. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1214690
45. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New directions for program evaluation, 1986(30), 73-84.
46. MacDonald, G. (1976), “The Politics of Educational Publishing,” G. Whitty and M. Young (eds.), Explorations in the Politics of School Knowledge, Driffield: Nafferton Books: 145-169.
47. McDonald, C. V., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (Eds.). (2017). Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks: A global perspective. Taylor & Francis.
48. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
49. Miller, S. (2003). Analysis of phenomenological data generated with children as research participants. Nurse researcher, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2003.07.10.4.68.c5908
50. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2022). Taslak Ders Kitabı ve Eğitim Araçları İle Bunlara Ait Elektronik İçeriklerin İncelenmesinde Değerlendirmeye Esas Olacak Kriterler ve Açıklamaları. https://kitapinceleme.meb.gov.tr/De%C4%9Ferlendirmeye%20Esas%20Olacak%20Kriterler%20ve%20A%C3%A7%C4%B1klamalar%C4%B1.pdf
51. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage.
52. Misra, J., & Strader, E. (2013). Gender pay equity in advanced countries: The role of parenthood and policies. Journal of International Affairs, 27-41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24461670
53. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Oakley, A. (Ed.). (2005). The Ann Oakley reader: Gender, women and social science. Policy Press.
55. Özdemir, E., & Karaboğa, A. B. (2019). Ortaokul matematik ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet [ Gender in Secondary School Mathematics Textbooks]. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 15(3), 760-781. https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.580405
56. Özkan, R. (2013). İlköğretim ders kitaplarında kadın figürü. [The figure of woman in primary education textbooks] The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(5), 617-631. http://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS1567
57. Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of women quarterly, 26(4), 269-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066
58. Ruiz-Cecilia, R., Guijarro-Ojeda, J. R., & Marín-Macías, C. (2020). Analysis of heteronormativity and gender roles in EFL textbooks. Sustainability, 13(1), 220. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010220
59. Sarıtaş, E., & Şahin, Ü. (2018). Hayat bilgisi ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri üzerine bir inceleme [An examınatıon on gender roles ın socıal scıences course books]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, (48), 463-477. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.351555
60. Sönmez, K., & Dikmenli, Y. (2021). İlkokul sosyal bilgiler ders kitabının toplumsal cinsiyet açısından incelenmesi [Analysis of primary school social studies textbook in terms of gender]. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 10(1), 434-458. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.732000
61. Starks H, Brown., & Trinidad S. (2007). Choose Your Method: A Comparison of Phenomenology, Discourse Analysis, and Grounded Theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17(10), 1372-1380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307307031
62. Şafak, Ş., Çopur, Z., & Özkan, M. (2006). Çocukların evle ilgili faaliyetlere harcadıkları zamanın incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyolojik Araştırmalar E-Dergisi.
63. Taylor, F. (2003). Content analysis and gender stereotypes in children's books. Teaching sociology, 300-311. https://doi.org/10.2307/3211327
64. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2017). Cracking the code: Education of girls' and women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM). (978-92-3-100233-5). https://doi.org/10.54675/QYHK2407
65. UNESCO (2021). Küresel öncelik olarak toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği. https://www.unesco.org.tr/Pages/42/215/Toplumsal-Cinsiyet-E%C5%9Fitli%C4%9Fi-
66. Uçar, C. & Somuncuoğlu Özerbaş, D. (2017). Evaluation of the secondary school 5th grade science textbooks according to visual design principles. Kastamonu Education Journal, 25 (4), 1373-1388. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/kefdergi/issue/30766/332473
67. Yang, T., & Aldrich, H. E. (2014). Who’s the Boss? Explaining Gender Inequality in Entrepreneurial Teams. American Sociological Review, 79(2), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414524207
68. Yıldız, Y. N., Tabaru, G. (2017). Fen bı̇lı̇mlerı̇ 3 ve 4. sınıf öğretı̇m programı ı̇le ders kı̇taplarının yer temellı̇ eğı̇tı̇m açısından ı̇ncelenmesı̇ [Evaluatıon of 3rd and 4th grade course books and scıence currıculum ın terms of place-based educatıon]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 1584-1605. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2017.17.31178-338849
69. Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (7.baskı). Seçkin.
70. Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage