Gender bias in Australia’s senior science curriculum · ICGS Research Library

Title

Gender bias in Australia’s senior science curriculum

Author

Ross et al. (2023)

Year Published

2023

Description

Australian researchers have considered the challenge of engaging girls in STEM by analysing the role of gender bias in four senior secondary Australian science courses. The under-representation of girls and women in STEM is a well-recognised issue. Girls’ school educators regularly find themselves on the frontline of this issue as they implement initiatives and opportunities to combat the negative effect of gender interest stereotypes and a lack of positive female role models (Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia [AGSA], 2022a; 2022b; 2022c; Australian Government Department of Industry, Science and Resources, 2022). The researchers who developed this paper have discussed some possible interventions to reduce gender bias in Biology, Chemistry, Environmental Science and Physics classes and improve engagement rates for girls. This provides useful strategies that can be considered when delivering STEM content in girls’ schools.

The authors assessed the latest curriculum offered for senior secondary science courses across Australia. Only courses that were “common across all curricula and [were] part of the Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank (ATAR)” were included (Ross et al., 2023, p. 4). Ross et al. (2023) considered the representation of women both through mentions of scientist names and mentions of scientific concepts (and how these were linked to gender). The project also considered the presence of a Eurocentric focus in the courses, although this was considered separately to the presence of gender bias.

The initial outcomes of this research were interesting, if not unsurprising given the gender bias present more broadly in STEM. In the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria, and Western Australia curricula there were no female scientists mentioned (Ross et al., 2023, p. 7). Only 1.4 percent of mentions in the Queensland curriculum were female scientists, and 1.5 percent in the South Australia/Northern Territory courses (these were considered in combination as both use the same curriculum content) (Ross et al., 2023, p. 7).

A national trend across all curricula was clear that in the majority of cases, students were exposed to scientists in these courses “via relevant discovering being named after the scientist who discovered them” (Ross et al., 2023, p. 13). This is problematic given that these naming conventions historically excluded women, and female achievements were regularly miscredited to men (Ross et al., 2023, p. 13). This has created a narrative of a “lone male genius” (Ross et al., 2023, p. 13). The researchers have suggested that this can reduce girls’ ability to perceive where they may fit in scientific fields and can decrease their performance in the classroom (Ross et al., 2023, p. 13).

The concept of the “lone male genius” is highly problematic. There have been attempts to improve this approach in these courses by encouraging students to “investigate the ‘multiple individuals’ who contributed to a specific scientific discovery” (Ross et al., 2023, p. 14). While this can inadvertently minimise the work of women in STEM, it nonetheless provides educators with an opportunity to include a focus on significant female achievements in the field. It can also encourage a “student-driven approach to investigating the contributing scientists” (Ross et al., 2023, p. 14). Importantly, the authors note that while some Australian states are making an effort to shift away from this narrative, New South Wales “is the only state that actively reinforces this ‘lone male genius’ narrative” (Ross et al., 2023, p. 14).

This holds significant implications for girls well beyond a presence of female scientists in the curricula of senior science courses. The researchers’ consideration of Eurocentrism within the curricula also highlighted further implications for girls who do not identify with Anglo-Australian backgrounds. The absence of scientists from culturally and linguistically diverse communities and female scientists in these courses “poses a significant hindrance” to girls including those with diverse backgrounds (Ross et al., 2023, p. 15). It can also inhibit their ability to develop a relatability towards positive role models.

The researchers who developed this review of senior science courses have discussed a range of strategies. This includes the need to ensure significant female figures are actively integrated into the curricula for these courses. Ross et al. (2023) do note that including the names of female scientists alone is not a complete solution, as this would be a tokenistic measure. It would not address the true gender bias present in the curricula for these courses. The authors also believe that the barriers faced by female scientists should be studied so that girls can be fully aware of the significance of their achievements. Their research suggests that “without the historical and contextual backgrounds of women in STEM, it runs the risk of [once again] becoming