The Examination of the Reflections of the Universal Design Learning-Based Gender Role Program on University Students

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of a Universal Design for Learning (UDL)-based gender role program on university students. The research was carried out utilizing an embedded mixed research design. The participants in the research took part in a UDL-Based Gender Role Program that focused on sustainable development goals and gender equality. The study group included 15 female (83.3%) and three male (16.7%) university students enrolled in undergraduate programs at a foundation university during the 2021-2022 academic year. The Gender Roles Attitude Scale, reflection papers, learning diaries, and focus group interviews were used to collect data. SPSS was used to conduct quantitative data analysis using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test. The content analysis technique was used to analyse the qualitative data. The quantitative results of the study found no statistically significant difference between participants' pre-test and post-test scores in terms of egalitarian gender roles, female gender roles, and total scores for sub-dimension of gender roles in marriage. However, the post-test showed a statistically significant difference in overall scores for traditional gender roles and male gender role sub-dimensions. The qualitative outcomes of the study revealed that studies on gender roles have a positive impact on participants' perceptions and awareness.

Keywords

• Gender equality
• Gender roles
• Universal Design

Evrensel Tasarım Temelli Toplumsal Cinsiyet Rolleri Programının Üniversite Öğrencileri Üzerindeki Yansımalarının İncelenmesi

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cinsiyet eşitliği
• Cinsiyet rolleri
• Evrensel Tasarım

References

1. Akım, M. H. & Aydemir, M. A. (2007). Üniversitede okuyan kız öğrenciler cinsiyet rolü tutumları bağlamında aile ve evlilik kurumuna bakışları (Selçuk Üniversitesi örneği). Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Edebiyat Dergisi, 18, 43-60.
2. Alisbah-Tuskan, A. (2012). Toplumsal cinsiyet toplumda kadına biçilen roller ve çözümleri. Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, 25(99), 445-449.
3. Arslan A. (2019). Eğitimde güncel konular ve yeni yaklaşımlar. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
4. Ateş, A., P. (2017). Üniversite öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri ve kadına yönelik şiddete ilişkin tutumları: Dicle Üniversitesi örneği (University students gender roles and attitudes regardindg violence against women: The sample of Dicle University). (Thesis No: 471060) [Master’s Thesis, Dicle University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
5. Aydemir, S. (2019). Toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliğine duyarlı medya okuryazarlığı eğitiminin öğretmen adaylarının toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliğine ilişkin tutumlarına etkisi (The effects of gender equality awareness media literacy training on the attitudes of prospective teachers about gender equality). (Thesis No: 608790) [Master’s Thesis, Gazi University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
6. Aydın, M. (2000). Kurumlar sosyolojisi. Vadi Yayınları.
7. Başak, N. & Bulut-Serin, N. (2021). Toplum tarafından kadına biçilen roller ve toplumsal cinsiyet sorunu (The roles assigned to women by society and the gender problem). 2nd International Science, Education, Art and Technology Symposium, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
8. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2): 155-162.

9. Bradley, R. and Corwyn, R. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 371-399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233.
10. Budak, H. & Küçükşen, K. (2018). Türkiye’nin sosyal transformasyon sürecinde Y kuşağının toplumsal cinsiyet rolü tutumları. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17(66), 561-576. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.335865.
11. Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). Gender. Retrieved May 6, 2024, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gender.
12. Campos, M., García, C., & Alba-Pastor, C. (2018). Executive functions in universal design for learning: moving towards inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(6), 660-674. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1474955.
13. Chen, B., Bastedo, K., & Howard, W. (2018). Exploring best practices for online stem courses: active learning, interaction and assessment design. Online Learning, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1369.
14. Çokluk, Ö., Oğuz, E., & Yılmaz, K. (2011). Nitel bir görüşme yöntemi: Odak grup görüşmesi (A qualitative interview method: Focus group interview). Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 4(1), 95-107.
15. Constantinople, A. (1973). Masculinity-femininity: An exception to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80(5), 389-407.
16. Cotter, D., Hermsen, J., & Vanneman, R. (2011). The end of the gender revolution? gender role attitudes from 1977 to 2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117(1), 259-289. https://doi.org/10.1086/658853.
17. Courey, S., Tappe, P., Siker, J., & LePage, P. (2012). Improved lesson planning with universal design for learning (UDL). Teacher Education and Special Education the Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 36(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406412446178.
18. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education, Inc.
19. Cüceloğlu, D. (2006). İnsan ve davranışı: Psikolojinin temel kavramları. Remzi Kitabevi.
20. Darling‐Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C. M., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2019). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.
21. Dempsey, A., Hunt, E., Lone, M., & Nolan, Y. (2022). Awareness of universal design for learning among anatomy educators in higher level institutions in the republic of Ireland and United Kingdom. Clinical Anatomy, 36(1), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.23947.
22. Dicke, A., Safavian, N., & Eccles, J. (2019). Traditional gender role beliefs and career attainment in stem: a gendered story? Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01053.
23. Doğan-Yaylak, D. (2023). İlkokul 4. Sınıf öğrencilerinin sosyal bilgiler dersinde toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliğine yönelik farkindalıklarının gelişimi: Bir durum çalışması (Development of primary school 4th grade students’ awareness about gender equality in social studies course: A case study). (Thesis No: 822528) [Master’s Thesis, Ordu University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
24. Durutürk, B. (2020). Toplumsal cinsiyet rollerinin “şifreleme-deşifreleme” kuramı üzerinden değerlendirilmesi. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 24(1), 53-64.
25. Eagly, A. H. (2009). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: resolving the contradictions. Discovering Leadership, 277-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-24203-7_20.
26. Fichter, J. (1994). Sosyoloji nedir? (N. Çelebi, Çev.). Atilla Kitabevi.
27. Galkienė, A. and Monkevičienė, O. (2021). Preconditions of transforming the educational process by applying inclusive education strategies: Theoretical background. Improving inclusive education through universal design for learning, 5, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80658-3_1.
28. Gök, A. (2018). Kadınların liderlik ve toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri: kültürler arası karşılaştırma (Women's leadership and social gender roles: Cultural comparison) (Thesis No: 508999) [Master’s Thesis, Turkish Aeronautical Association University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
29. Gravel, J. (2018). Going deep: leveraging universal design for learning to engage all learners in rich disciplinary thinking in ELA. Teachers College Record, 120(3), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000302.
30. Güden, M., P. (2006). Dilde cinsiyet ayrımcılığı: Türkçe’nin içerdiği eril ve dişil ifadeler bakımından incelenmesi (Sexism in language: studying on Turkish language from the perspective of feminine and masculine expressions) (Thesis No: 214640) [Master’s Thesis, Istanbul University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
31. Gülcan, C., (2021). Nitel bir veri toplama aracı: Odak (focus) grup tekniğinin uygulanışı ve geçerliği üzerine bir çalışma. Mersin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü e-Dergisi, 4(2), 94-109.
32. Hall, S. S. and Adams, R. (2011). Newlyweds’ unexpected adjustments to marriage. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 39(4), 375-387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-3934.2011.02076.x.
33. Hernández, L. E., Darling‐Hammond, L., Adams, J., Bradley, K. H., & Duncan-Grand, D. (2022). Pushing against the grain: networks and their systems for sustaining and spreading deeper learning. Journal of Educational Change, 24(4), 871-895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09467-1.
34. Hyde, J., Bigler, R., Joel, D., Tate, C., & Anders, S. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171-193. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307.
35. İsen, G., Batmaz, V. (2002). Ben ve toplum- sosyal psikoloji. OM Yayınları.
36. Kamışlı, E. (2018). Toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri ve aile işlevselliğinin problem çözme becerilerine etkisi (The effects of social gender roles and family functionality on problem solving skills) (Thesis No: 512920) [Master’s Thesis, Istanbul Ticaret University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
37. Katawazai, R. (2021). Implementing outcome-based education and student-centered learning in Afghan public universities: The current practices and challenges. Heliyon, 7(5), e07076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07076.
38. Kerimbayev, N., Umirzakova, Z., Shadiev, R., & Jotsov, V. (2023). A student-centered approach using modern technologies in distance learning: a systematic review of the literature. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00280-8.
39. Köroğlu, E. N. (2022). Kadın güçlendirme psikoeğitim programının kadın üniversite öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri tutumu ve toplumsal cinsiyet rolü stresine etkisi (The effect of the woman empowerment psychoeducation program on the gender role attitudes and gender role stress of female university students). (Thesis No: 764723) [Master’s Thesis, Maltepe University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
40. Kumar, K. & Wideman, M. (2014). Accessible by design: applying UDL principles in a first year undergraduate course. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(1), 125-147. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v44i1.183704.
41. López, V., Corona, R., & Halfond, R. (2013). Effects of gender, media influences, and traditional gender role orientation on disordered eating and appearance concerns among latino adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 36(4), 727-736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.05.005.
42. McCabe, P. C. (2022). Early childhood educators' beliefs about child behavior and adult outcomes related to gender and play. Psychology in the Schools, 59(1), 51-75. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22502.
43. Mert, H., Bilik, Ö., Yıldırım Sarı, H., & Üstün, B. (2014). Bir öğrenme deneyimi: reflekşın (reflection). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Yüksekokulu Elektronik Dergisi 4(2), 89-93.
44. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. T. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
45. Moon, J. A. (2006). Learning journals: A handbook for reflective practice and professional development. Routledge.
46. Munna, A. S. & Kalam, A. (2021). Teaching and learning process to enhance teaching effectiveness: literature review. International Journal of Humanities and Innovation (IJHI), 4(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.33750/ijhi.v4i1.102.
47. Oakley, A. (1972). Sex, gender and society. Temple Smith.
48. Özveren, A., D. & Dama, N. (2022). Türkiye’deki toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliğine dair mevcut durum algısı. Çalışma İlişkisi Dergisi 13(1), 107-122.
49. Padmanabha, C. H. (2023). Perception of prospective teachers towards gender role: A case study. Journal on Educational Psychology, 16(4), 72-74. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.16.4.19143.
50. Pehlivan, M. (2018). Toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri çerçevesinde aile içi kadına yönelik şiddet algısı (Perception of domestic violence against women in the context of gender roles) (Thesis No: 504403) [Master’s Thesis, Sakarya University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
51. Pesen, A., Kara, İ., Kale, M., Abbak, B. S., (2016). Üniversite öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyet algısı ile çatışma ve şiddete ilişkin farkındalık düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(11), 325-340.
52. Pliner, S. & Johnson, J. (2004). Historical, theoretical, and foundational principles of universal instructional design in higher education. Equity & Excellence in Education, 37(2), 105-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680490453913.
53. Pokrzywa, M. (2018). The role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in women’s education in Poland. International Journal on Lifelong Education and Leadership, 4(1), 15-20.
54. Rao, K., Ok, M., & Bryant, B. (2014). A review of research on universal design educational models. Remedial and Special Education, 35(3), 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513518980.
55. Reeves, H, & Baden, S. (2000). Gender and development: concepts and definitions. Institute of Development Studies, UK, Brighton.
56. Rose, D. & Strangman, N. (2007). Universal design for learning: meeting the challenge of individual learning differences through a neurocognitive perspective. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(4), 381-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-006-0062-8.
57. Rose, D.H. & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. USA.
58. Şahin, M. (2019). Kültür aktarımında toplumsal cinsiyetin rolü. Akademik Hassasiyetler 6(11), 233-249.
59. Smith, S. & Harvey, E. (2014). K-12 online lesson alignment to the principles of universal design for learning: The Khan academy. Journal of Open Distance and E-Learning, 29(3), 222-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2014.992402.
60. Smith, S., Rao, K., Lowrey, K., Gardner, J., Moore, E., Coy, K., & Wojcik, B. (2019). Recommendations for a national research agenda in UDL: Outcomes from the udl-irn preconference on research. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 30(3), 174-185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207319826219.
61. Tarhan, E. (2019). Kadın akademisyenlerin sınırsız ve çok yönlü kariyer tutumları: kişilik ve toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri açısından bir inceleme (Academic women's boundaryless and protean career attitudes: An examination regarding personality and gender roles) (Thesis No: 603368) [Doctoral Dissertation, Ankara University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
62. Verdugo-Castro S., García-Holgado, A., & Sánchez-Gómez, M.C. (2022). The gender gap in higher STEM studies: A systematic literature review. Heliyon, 19(8), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10300.
63. Wilson, J. & Jan, L.W. (1993). Thinking for themselves: Developing strategies for reflective learning. Eleanor Curtain Publishing.
64. Yaşın-Dökmen, Z. (1999). Bem cinsiyet rolü envanteri kadınsılık ve erkeksilik ölçekleri Türkçe formunun psikometrik özellikleri. Kriz Dergisi, 7(1), 27-40.
65. Yılmaz, M. (2017). Üniversite öğrencilerinin eş seçimi tercihlerine göre toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri tutumlarının incelenmesi (Examination of gender roles attitudes university seniors according to mate selection preferences) (Thesis No: 488655) [Master’s Thesis, Gaziantep University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
66. Zeyneloğlu, S. & Terzioğlu F. (2011). Development and psycometric properties gender roles attitude scale. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 40, 409- 420.
67. Zubaroğlu-Yanardağ, M. & Özmete, E. (2016). Erkeklerin bakış açısıyla toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri: Kadın ve erkek olmanın değeri. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 20(1), 91-107. https://doi.org/10.20296/tsad.12106.