File) and That Any Results Used Would Be Annonymised

Girls and A level physics : identity and choices THORLEY, Amelia Deborah Maud Available from the Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/17710/ A Sheffield Hallam University thesis This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Please visit http://shura.shu.ac.uk/17710/ and http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html for further details about copyright and re-use permissions. Sheffield Hallam University Learning and form ation Services Adsetts Centre. City Campus 'IZOIS Sheffield 3 ‘i 1VVD 102 056 903 4 Sheffield Hallam University Learning and information Services Adsetts Centre, City Campus Sheffield S1 1WD REFERENCE Girls and A level Physics: Identity and Choices Amelia Deborah Maud Thorley A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Sheffield Hallam University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2014 Abstract This thesis addresses the question of how physics identity and physics self efficacy influence girls’ choices to study or not to study physics post-16. This question is important because only 20% of the overall 16-18 physics cohort in England and Wales is female. A theoretical framework for physics identity is proposed using socio-cultural theories. An extensive review of the current literature on the issue of girls in physics, physics identity and physics self efficacy was used to support this framework. A mixed methods methodology with a funnelling approach to selecting participants was used. Two schools were selected because they had in the past demonstrated a higher than average progression rate for girls onto post-16 physics. An initial questionnaire was completed by 458 14 and 15 year old pupils. From the answers given on the questionnaire, 43 girls were selected to participate in three rounds of small group interviews. These girls were ones who were both thinking of studying physics post-16 and those who were not. Finally, extended narratives of four girls were developed to illustrate the links between physics identity, physics self efficacy and physics choice. Descriptive analysis of the questionnaire data was used to give a background picture of the pupils’ overall views about science and physics, science and physics teachers and lessons and how they felt about physics. The group interview data was analysed thematically drawing on the themes identified in the literature review and themes that emerged from the data. The stories of four girls were analysed using narrative methodology. The results show that the issues of girls’ engagement in physics cannot be resolved unless a holistic view is taken; that developing identification with physics occurs within the wider identity development of the girls that takes place in the many figured worlds that they inhabit. Particular notice needs to be taken of how girls’ identification with physics develops due to interactions with teachers; how physics plays a part in the discourse of achievement and how society in general influences this identification. The research showed that there was little difference between future choosers and non choosers of physics. b Acknowledgements I would like to take this opportunity of expressing my thanks to all those people who have helped me in any way to complete this thesis. Firstly I would like to thank the management and teaching staff of the two schools who agreed to support my work by allowing me to interview their students. A massive thank you to the girls from both schools who came to talk to me and shared their experiences of physics with me. Without them, there would not be a thesis. My sincere thanks to Prof. Hilary Povey and Dr Mark Boylan for then- productive comments throughout the time I have been working on this project and their constructive feedback on the writing of the thesis. My thanks also to all the other staff and researchers at the University who have made helpful comments throughout this period. Finally I would like to thank my family and friends for all their support. To those who have read through earlier drafts to the thesis and commented on it; to those who have let me talk to them when I have had a problem; and especially to my extended family at St James who have given my much needed spiritual support throughout the whole research process. c Index Chapter 1 Introduction pi Science Education in England p2 Participation in A-level Physics p3 Researching Identity, Self Efficacy and Girls’ Physics Choices p7 Introducing My Position as a Researcher p9 The Thesis Outlined pi 1 Chapter 2 Girls and Physics pi3 Introduction pi 3 Gender and Science - a Historical View pi4 Recent Reviews of the Literature on Girls in Science and Physics pi 6 General Attitudes to Science and Physics p21 Choices p26 Choices linked to future careers p28 Influences of Teachers and Teaching p30 Influences of Others p36 The Image of Physics p37 Conclusion p43 Chapter 3 A Developing Framework for Identity and Self Efficacy p46 Introduction p46 Developing a Framework for Identity p47 What is identity? p47 Communities of Practice p50 Communities of practice in science education literature p51 Criticisms of communities of practice theory p55 Figured Worlds p57 Figured worlds in science education literature p58 Communities of Practice or Figured Worlds? p66 Self Efficacy p68 Studies of self efficacy p70 Identity, Self Efficacy and Narrative p72 i Summary p76 Chapter 4 Methodology and Method p78 Introduction p78 Methodological Approach p78 Pilot Research p81 Case Study Methodology p82 School Selection p85 Questionnaire p87 Lesson Observations p91 Interviews p92 Active interviewing p92 Interview sampling and conduct p94 Interview data processing p95 Interview analysis p98 Developing Narratives p99 Ethical Issues pi 04 Chapter 5 The Schools and The Questionnaire Results pl07 Introduction pl07 The Schools pl07 Browning School pl07 Lesson observations p i 10 Hinton School p i 12 The Questionnaire Data p i 16 Possible A-level choices p i 17 Why choose or not choose physics? pl21 Physics words p i 24 How do I compare myself to others? pl27 Teachers and interest in science or physics pl30 Science and physics lessons pl34 Discussion p 141 Chapter 6 Do Only Polish Women Choose Physics? pi45 ii Introduction pi 45 Introducing the Interviewees pi46 Browning School pi47 Year 9 pl47 Year 10 pl50 Hinton School p i52 Year 9 pi52 Year 10 p 155 Summarising the interview groups pi57 Interview Themes and Process pi59 Exploring Reasons for A-level Physics Choices pi59 Influences pi 61 F amily influence s p 161 Peer influences pi64 Teacher influences pi66 Influence of society pi72 Self efficacy pi 80 Previous performance p 181 Comparison to similar others p 181 Feedback pi 83 Physiological factors p 185 Self efficacy and A-level physics choices p 186 A discourse of achievement pi 87 Discussing the Multiple Influences p 191 Chapter 7 Narratives of Identification with Physics pi 94 Introduction pi 94 Interview processes and analysis p 195 Rose pi 97 Indiana p207 Charlotte p214 Scout p219 Discussion p227 The four narratives p228 iii Relating the narratives to the literature p229 Chapter 8 Conclusion p235 Introduction p235 Research Outcomes p236 Making choices p237 Teacher - student interactions p23 8 Recommendations and implications p241 The discourse of achievement p242 Recommendations and implications p243 Similarity and differences between physics choosers and non choosers p244 Recommendations and implications p246 Complexity and interrelationships of figured worlds p247 Recommendations and implications p249 Researching Girls and Physics p249 Methodological processes p250 Theoretical frameworks p251 Limitations of the research p254 Future directions and further research p256 The Contribution of the Study p258 Concluding Remarks p259 References p262 Appendices p278 List of Tables and Figures Chart 1-1 - A-level Physics Entries 2000-2011 p4 Chart 1-2 - AS level Physics Entries 2001-2011 p5 Figure 3-1 Configuring identity trajectories p63 Figure 3-2 Representations of four of the many possible science identity trajectories a hypothetical latecomer to science may construct during her first year in CEGEP science p65 Table 5-1 Reported ethnicity of pupils in survey sample p 109 Table 5-2 Reported socioeconomic background of parents/guardians of pupils in survey sample p i 09 Table 5-3 AS Physics gender breakdown pi 13 Table 5-4 A2 Physics gender breakdown pi 13 Table 5-5 Reported ethnicity of pupils in survey sample pi 14 Table 5-6 Reported socioeconomic background of parents/guardians of pupils in survey sample p 115 Table 5-7 Pupils who answered survey pi 16 Chart 5-1 Browning Year 9 A-level choices pi 18 Chart 5-2 Browning Year 10 A-level choices pi 18 Chart 5-3 Hinton Year 9 A-level choices pi 19 Chart 5-4 Hinton Year 10 A-level choices pi20 Table 5-8 Reasons for Thinking of Choosing A-level Physics pi 22 Table 5-9 Reasons for Not Thinking of Choosing A-level Physics pl23 Chart 5-5 Girls who are thinking of choosing A-level physics p i 25 Chart 5-6 Boys who are thinking of choosing A-level physics pi 25 Chart 5-7 Girls who are not thinking of choosing A-level physics p i 26 Chart 5-8 Boys who are not thinking of choosing A-level physics pi 27 Table 5-10 Comparing my physics ability to the rest of my class

Load more