ABSTRACT
Structural and symbolic levels can impact the individual level and, in particular, the socialization process that contributes to one’s identity. The gender system is hierarchical (Harding, 1986; Risman & Davis, 2013). The formation of gender establishes difference between female and male; typically female is subordinate to male. The understanding of femininity and masculinity within the three levels differs from one culture to another and over time, but within one culture, these three levels of gender are related to each other. Gender theory is also sensitive for other social categories such as ethnicity, age, socioeconomic status, religion, language profi ciency, and sexuality. Despite calls from feminist science educators for a more refi ned gender analysis that would include these other social categories, there is little information on how these factors, along with gender, infl uence student achievement on international and national tests or participation patterns in science ( structural issues ). Previous research has documented how teachers’ practices and instruction can mediate students’ learning, but there are few recent studies that examine how teachers’ pedagogical practices and student expectations are infl uenced by gender. Gender studies at this symbolic level are needed. Finally, there is limited research on how a student’s gender impacts her/ his learning, attitude toward science, achievement, and/ or participation in science ( individual ). Although in science education, we explore issues of identity and science learning, gender is rarely, if at all, foregrounded in the research.
