The gendered doing of physics: A conceptual framework and its application for exploring undergraduate physics students’ identity formation in relation to laboratory work Anna T. Danielsson January 2007 Supervisor: Professor Cedric Linder Dissertation for the degree of Licentiate of Philosophy in Physics with Specialization in Physics Education Uppsala University, 2007 Abstract In this licentiate thesis I explore undergraduate physics students’ experiences of doing laboratory work in physics and, in particular, how this relates to the gendering of physics in relation to their formation of physicist identities. I outline a conceptual framework for exploring the gendered nature of learn- ing physics in the laboratory setting, and in this framework situated cogni- tion and post-structural gender theory are merged together. This allows me to analyze gender as an active process and to relate the dynamics of this process to the emerging physicist identities of the students. Thus, my con- ceptual framework allows for an analysis of the gendered learning experi- ences in physics that goes well beyond the usual ‘women-friendly’ teaching approaches. The conceptual framework has been developed ‘in conversation’ with an empirical study, where thirteen undergraduate physics students were interviewed about their experiences of learning from and doing laboratory work. I found these students to be constituting their physicist identities in relation both to different forms of ‘physicist masculinities’ and to what they characterized as ‘normal femininity’. The results, which are described in- depth in the thesis, are given and illustrated both in terms of the conceptual framing and descriptions taken from the interviews. Further, the results show the importance for teachers to deepen their understanding of students’ iden- tity formation in order to improve the students’ learning experiences in phys- ics, in the student laboratory as well as beyond it. List of papers and conference presentations Danielsson, A. (2005). University students' experience of doing laboratory work in physics. Poster presented at the Junior Researchers for EARLI Pre- conference at the 11th European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, Nicosia, Cyprus, August, 2005. Danielsson, A. (2005). Gender in the student in the student laboratory. An exploration of students' experiences of doing laboratory work in university physics. Poster presented at the Physics Education Research Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, August 2005. Danielsson, A., Lippmann Kung, R. & Linder, C. (2005). Female Physics Majors' Experiences of Doing University Laboratory Work. Paper presented at the American Association of Physics Teachers Summer Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah, August, 2005. Danielsson, A. & Linder, C. (2006). Gendered identities in the physics stu- dent laboratory. Paper presented at the Gender and Science and Technology 12 International Conference, Brighton, England, September, 2006. Danielsson, A. & Linder, C. (in review), Learning in Physics by doing Labo- ratory Work: toward a new Conceptual Framework. Submitted to Gender and Education. Contents Prelude: Women doing physics in Uppsala around the year 1900................12 Populärvetenskaplig introduktion .................................................................21 1 Introduction .........................................................................................24 1.1 Research Question......................................................................25 1.2 Outline of the thesis....................................................................25 1.3 Conceptualising gender ..............................................................26 1.3.1 What is this thing called gender?...........................................26 1.3.2 A brief history of gender and science education....................28 1.3.3 Feminist philosophy of science..............................................29 1.3.4 Post-structural gender theory .................................................31 2 Literature Review ................................................................................34 2.1 Physics education research.........................................................34 Prologue...............................................................................................34 2.1.1 Introduction............................................................................35 2.1.1.1 Outline ........................................................................35 2.1.2 Students’ conceptions ............................................................36 2.1.3 Development of theories of learning......................................37 2.1.4 New directions in PER...........................................................39 2.1.4.1 Student epistemology .................................................39 2.1.4.2 Metacognition.............................................................42 2.1.5 Approaches to teaching..........................................................42 2.1.6 Physics education research outside PER................................43 2.1.7 Where do we go next? ...........................................................43 2.2 Situating the study in previous research.....................................44 2.2.1 Physics education research and gender..................................44 2.2.2 Learning in the student laboratory .........................................45 2.3 My study.....................................................................................46 3 Conceptual framework.........................................................................49 3.1 Outline of framework .................................................................49 3.2 Gender theory and situated cognition.........................................49 3.3 Important ideas in situated cognition .........................................50 3.4 Important ideas in post-structural gender theory........................51 3.4.1 Masculinities and femininities as communities of practice ...52 3.5 Practice and identity ...................................................................53 3.5.1 Practice ..................................................................................53 3.5.1.1 Meaning......................................................................54 3.5.1.2 Community.................................................................54 3.5.1.3 Boundary ....................................................................55 3.5.2 Identity...................................................................................55 3.5.2.1 Identity in practice......................................................56 3.5.2.2 Participation and non-participation ............................57 3.5.2.3 Modes of belonging....................................................58 3.5.3 Relations of power.................................................................58 4 Research methodology.........................................................................61 4.1 Data collection............................................................................61 4.1.1 The interviews........................................................................62 4.2 Analysis......................................................................................63 4.3 Trustworthiness ..........................................................................66 4.3.1 Credibility ..............................................................................67 4.3.2 Dependability.........................................................................67 4.3.3 Transferability........................................................................67 4.3.4 Confirmability........................................................................68 4.3.5 Yet another set of criteria: Fidelity ........................................69 4.4 The evolution of the research question.......................................70 5 Literature Review: Gender in the physicist community of practice ....76 5.1.1 Practice ..................................................................................76 5.1.1.1 Meaning......................................................................76 5.1.1.2 Community and boundary ..........................................78 6 Results and analysis.............................................................................81 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................81 6.1.1 Name conventions..................................................................82 6.2 Masculinities and femininities in and against physics................82 6.2.1 The practical physicist masculinity........................................84 6.2.2 The analytical physicist masculinity......................................85 6.2.3 What about femininities?.......................................................86 6.2.4 Format of data analysis..........................................................87 6.3 Paul.............................................................................................87 6.4 Ann .............................................................................................91 6.5 Kalle ...........................................................................................98 6.6 David ........................................................................................100 6.7 Susan ........................................................................................103 6.8