{ReportTitle}
Return to Table of
Contents
Previous Page
Although only in its first year of implementation, OTH appears
to be having a positive impact on the participating teachers
and students. Teachers have greater access to current inquiry-based
science and math curricular materials, classroom activities,
and training opportunities. As a result, they are able to
provide stronger math and science programs for the OTH girls
they serve, as well as the rest of their middle school students.
In fact, two OTH teachers have taken the Enviroscape curricular
materials they received through participation in OTH and developed
a sixth grade unit of study entitled "Pollution Solutions".
Finally, the teachers have a better understanding of instructional
techniques that best meet the needs of the female students
under their care.
The OTH girls have had the chance to participate in hands-on
science and math investigations based around real-world issues
that illustrate that science and math can be fun as well as
interesting. In addition, the girls have had the opportunity
to interact with other female students their age, female college
students majoring in math and science fields, and women in
various science and math careers. Exposure to these role models
appears to be boosting their academic performance, as well
as their understanding of career options that might typically
be ignored considering the girls' geographic isolation.
Building an understanding and appreciation for math and science
and their application to all areas of our lives is a stepping
stone to complex problem solving and insight about the way
the world works (Wood, 2000). Females who possess skills in
these areas will have greater opportunities and higher salaries
than those who do not. However, even though women make up
almost half of the labor market, they are underrepresented
in jobs in scientific fields (NCES, 1997). A gender gap still
exists, and it widens as students climb the education ladder.
We must continue to find ways of showing girls that they have
the capability to succeed in these areas.
Return to Table of
Contents
American Association of University Women (1992). How schools
shortchange girls-the AAUW report: A study of major findings
on girls and education. NY: Marlowe & Company.
Baker, D., & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about
science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32,
3-27.
DeBacker, T.K., & Nelson, R.M. (1999). Variations on an expectancy-value
model in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
24, 71-94.
DeBacker, T.K., & Nelson, R.M. (2001). Motivation to learn
science: Differences related to gender, class type, and ability.
Journal of Educational Research, 93(4), 245-255.
Kemp, P.A., Wing, B.D., & Gordon, A.W. (2000). Opening
the horizon: strengthening science education for middle school
girls in rural Southwest Missouri. (National Science Foundation
[NSF] Grant #0002129). Springfield, MO: Southwest Missouri
State University, Mathematics Department.
Mervis, J. (2001). What keeps girls out of science. Science
Now, 3.
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
(1998). Missouri show-me standards and Missouri frameworks.
MO, Jefferson City.
National Center For Education Statistics (NCES). (July 1997).
Findings from the condition of education 1997: Women in mathematics
and science. Retrieved March 28,2002, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=97982.
National Research Council [NRC], (1996). National science
education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press.
Thom, M. (2002). Girls in science and technology: What's
new what's next? Education Digest, 67(5), 17-24.
West, K. (2000). She's psyched about science. Scientific
American Explorations, 3(4), 44-46.
Wood, J.M. (1999). The girls have it! Instructor, 109(6),
31-35.
Return to Table of
Contents
Table 1
Teacher Assessment of OTH Impact on Teaching and Learning
Behaviors; Representing Shortened Forms of Survey Questions,
Means, and Frequency of Teacher Responses (n = 16)
Questions |
Mean
|
Strongly Agree
|
Agree
|
Neutral
|
Disagree
|
Strongly Disagree
|
#1 More project-based |
4.25
|
6
|
9
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
#2 More exploratory |
3.94
|
3
|
10
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
#3 Fewer worksheets |
3.19
|
0
|
7
|
5
|
4
|
0
|
#4 More problem-based |
3.88
|
1
|
13
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
#5 Less lecturingmore hands-on |
3.94
|
5
|
6
|
4
|
1
|
0
|
#6 More group tasks |
3.69
|
2
|
8
|
5
|
1
|
0
|
#7 More research |
3.88
|
3
|
9
|
3
|
1
|
0
|
#8 Better equipped to meet standards |
3.81
|
2
|
11
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
#9 More illustrative of true nature of science |
3.88
|
1
|
13
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
#10 More connections math/science &life |
3.81
|
2
|
10
|
3
|
1
|
0
|
Table 2
Teacher Assessment of OTH Impact on Students; Representing Shortened
Forms of Survey Questions, Means, & Frequency of Teacher
Responses (n=14)
Questions |
Mean
|
Strongly Agree
|
Agree
|
Neutral
|
Disagree
|
Strongly Disagree
|
#1 More active in math/science class |
4.21
|
3
|
11
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
#2 More interest math/science careers |
4.21
|
3
|
11
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
#3Better understanding of connection science/math & their lives |
4.21
|
3
|
11
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
#4 Stronger desire to seek further science/math education |
4.28
|
6
|
6
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
#5 Motivated by OTHsharing experiences with others
|
4.57
|
8
|
6
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Return to Table of
Contents
|