帳號:guest(216.73.216.146)          離開系統
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  

詳目顯示

以作者查詢圖書館館藏以作者查詢臺灣博碩士論文系統以作者查詢全國書目
作者(中文):侯玉芬
作者(外文):Hou, Yu-Fen
論文名稱(中文):台灣理工女大學生之心理社會發展經驗
論文名稱(外文):The Psychosocial Development Experiences of Taiwanese University Female Students Majoring in Science or Engineering
指導教授(中文):林旖旎
指導教授(外文):Lin, Yii-Nii
口試委員(中文):黃軍義
邱怡欣
口試委員(外文):Huang, Jiun-Yih
Chiu, Yi-Hsin
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立清華大學
系所名稱:學習科學與科技研究所
學號:106291515
出版年(民國):109
畢業學年度:108
語文別:中文
論文頁數:159
中文關鍵詞:女大學生理工學習發展
外文關鍵詞:female university studentsscience and/or engineeringlearningdevelopment
相關次數:
  • 推薦推薦:0
  • 點閱點閱:163
  • 評分評分:*****
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏收藏:0
由於台灣傳統男理工、女人文的刻板印象,常影響女性的數理能力發展,女性於理工領域求學、工作與生存的經驗需要被重視與被了解。本研究採質性現象學研究法,探討十五位20到22歲就讀北台灣三所理工導向研究型大學的理工相關學系之女學生於大學生涯的整體、全面、多面向的心理社會發展經驗。
本研究結果呈現四大主題:理工科系就讀動機、於理工環境之學習成長歷程、心理社會發展經驗與轉變和生涯規劃抉擇。女大生於理工學系就讀的動機與情況呈現三大次主題:理工學系就讀動機、重要他人的支持及理工專業的學習。受訪者於理工環境之學習成長歷程呈現四大次主題:理工學系的性別互動狀況、挑戰與瓶頸、同儕相處及探索發現。受訪者於心理社會發展經驗與轉變呈現三大次主題:性別偏見之影響、自我價值的轉變與自我歸屬感。最後,受訪者於生涯規劃抉擇之兩大次主題包括續讀研究所、反思與調整心態。
理工女大生表示一些男老師對於女同學的課業表現相對包容,對男同學傾向期待與要求的課業標準較高。少數男老師對就讀理工的女同學呈現明顯性別偏見、歧視、貶抑的言論與態度,認為她們不適合就讀理工學系,也不適合於理工領域就業。就讀理工學系期間,受訪者常承受外界隱晦的性別偏見,她們一方面不喜歡因身為女性就讀理工而被外界另眼相看或擁有較特殊的待遇,卻也希望女性於理工領域被他人重視與認可,兩方的衝突常令其內心充滿掙扎與矛盾。此外,女教師、學姊及女助教常提供理工女大生同理、支持、開導與鼓勵,帶給她們信心與正能量,有助於女大生於理工領域的學習與發展。
本研究建議教師與相關專業者宜(1)推動教師與學生的性別教育,(2)改善師生們的性別觀念與態度,(3)營造性別平等與友善的學習環境,(4)能以女性的角度同理、支持並鼓舞女學生於理工領域發揮潛能與強化專業發展。女性就讀理工學系時,可多向女教師、女助教及學姊們請益與學習,與女性同儕間形成合作互助的小團體,相互分享與支持,建立親密信任的同性友誼,有助其適應理工環境、克服學習困難與度過生活挑戰。建議未來研究者可聚焦於女性就讀理工學系期間的(1)內心衝突矛盾的情況、(2)女性同儕團體之影響、(3)女性角色模範之影響、(4)與男性同儕的合作學習及(5)男教師對於理工女學生之影響等議題,更深入探究。
Due to the stereotypes of traditional male science and female literature in Taiwan, it often affects the development of women’s mathematical and/or science ability. We have to pay attention on and comprehend women’s study, work, and surviving in the science and/or engineering fields. This study adopts a qualitative phenomenological research method to explore the overall, comprehensive, and multi-faceted psychosocial development experiences of 15 female students, aged 20 to 22, in the science and/or engineering-related departments of three science and engineering-oriented research universities in Northern Taiwan. The main findings of this study are as follows.
The study results reveal four major themes: motivation to majoring in the science and/or engineering, learning and development in the environment of science and/or engineering, psychosocial development and transformation, and career planning and choices. Three subthemes are emerged in terms of the motivation of women's students majoring in the science and/or engineering: the motivation of studying in the science and/or engineering, the support of significant others, and professional learning of science and/or engineering. Participants’ learning and development process in the science and/or engineering environment reveals four subthemes: gender interaction, challenges and bottlenecks, peer relationships, and discovery. Three subthemes emerged in women students’ psychosocial development experience and transformations include the influence of gender bias, the change of self-worth, and the sense of self-belonging. Finally, the two subthemes of the women students’ career planning and choices are their planning to be enrolled in graduate schools, and their reflections and adjustments.
According to participants, some male teachers are relatively tolerant of female students’ academic performance, and tend to expect and request male students to have better academic performance than female students’. A small number of male teachers show obvious gender prejudice, discrimination, and derogatory statements and attitudes towards female students studying in science and/or engineering. These male teachers believe that women are not suitable for studying and/or working in the science and/or engineering fields. Majoring in the science and/or engineering programs, women students often suffer from the obscure gender prejudice from the public. Participants do not like to be treated differently or given special treatment solely because they are women in science and/or engineering. Also, they hope that women studying in science and/or engineering could be valued and identified by others. The conflict between the above two perspectives often makes them full of struggles and contradictions. In addition, female teachers, upper-classmates and teaching assistants often offer empathy, support, enlightenment and encouragement to women students in science and/or engineering, bringing them confidence and positive energy, and helping them to learn and develop well in science and/or engineering.
The author suggests that educators and professionals should (1) promote gender education for teachers and students, (2) improve teachers’ and students’ concepts and attitudes towards gender equality, (3) create a gender-friendly learning environment, and (4) emphasize, support, enlighten and encourage women students’ developing their potential and strengthening their professional development in science and/or engineering from the perspectives of women. Science and/or engineering women students can ask help and support from female teachers, upper-classmates and teaching assistants, and formulate small groups with female peers to share ideas and support each other, and establish intimate and trusting same-sex friendships to assist them adapt to the environment, overcome learning difficulties and live through life challenges. In the future, researchers could pay attention on the issues of female science/engineering university students’ conflicts and contradictions, and the influences of female peer groups, female role models, male peers, and male teachers on female science/engineering university students.
中文摘要I
Abstract II
目錄 IV
表目錄VI
圖目錄VII
第一章 緒論1
第一節 研究動機與背景1
第二節 研究目的2
第三節 名詞釋義2
第四節 研究範圍5
第二章 文獻回顧6
第一節 STEM定義與發展6
第二節 台灣女性大學生9
第三節 STEM女性大學生15
第四節 性別偏見21
第五節 心理社會發展理論25
第六節 社會性別理論28
第七節 文獻統整32
第三章 研究方法33
第一節 研究對象33
第二節 研究流程36
第三節 研究工具37
第四節 資料分析與檢核39
第五節 研究倫理42
第四章 研究結果43
第一節 就讀理工科系動機與情況43
第二節 於理工環境之學習成長歷程56
第三節 心理社會發展經驗與轉變95
第四節 生涯規劃抉擇110
第五節 結果統整116
第五章 討論123
第一節 綜合討論123
第二節 研究限制133
第三節 研究建議134
第四節 結論136
參考文獻137
附錄157


一、中文部分
STEM 教育 (2018)。2018-2023美國未來五年STEM教育關鍵。取自:https://www.everydayweplay365.com/singlepost/2018/07/12/20182023TRUMP-STEM-EDUCATION
于曉平 (2005)。高中數理資優女生選擇進入基礎科學科系之歷程研究。特殊教育公民訓育學報,9,161-200。
于曉平 (2007)。高中數理資優女生性別角色、生涯自我效能與生涯發展之關聯及角色楷模課程實驗之影響研究。未出版,國立臺灣師範大學博士論文,台北市。
王雅玄 (2012)。主宰性別主宰科技?科技性別化現象分析,科學教育學刊,20,3。
王雅玄 (2014)。如魚得水?科技女性成功論述之研究。教育科學研究期刊,59 (4),137-164。
王雅玄 (2016)。如履薄冰?科技女性陷阱論述之研究。科學教育學刊,24 (2),167 – 193。
王雅玄 (2017)。打破萬年窠臼的性別科技迷思。女科技人電子報,115。取自:http://www.twepress.net/new/seminar/item/167-seminar-115-1
王毅平 (2001)。社會性別理論:男女平等新視角。東岳論叢,22 (4),59- 61。
田秀蘭 (1998)。男女大學生生涯阻礙因素之分析研究。教育心理學報,30 (1),133-148。
田秀蘭 (2003)。社會認知生涯理論之興趣模式驗證研究。教育心理學報,34 (2),247-266。
自由時報 (2018)。女力崛起!調查:8成女性決心深耕科技業。取自: https://ec.ltn.com.tw/article/breakingnews/2605288
行政院 (2018)。APEC女性STEM最佳案例分享會─打破科技陽剛印象 「科科新女力」秀出女性新勢力。取自: https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/9277F759E41CCD91/50636006-3f59-459d-94f3-159300133b73
余民寧、翁雅芸、張靜軒 (2018)。數理科學的學習動機有性別差異嗎?一個來自後設分析的證據。當代教育研究季刊,26 (1),45-75。
余民寧、趙珮晴 (2010)。選擇科學職業意圖的性別差異分析-以TIMSS 2003台灣八年級學生為例。諮商輔導學報:高師輔導所刊,22,1-29。
吳春慧 (2010)。數學和科學領域I/E模式的探討:跨性別之研究。屏東教育大學學報-教育類,34,67-82。
吳淑敏 (2008)。傑出女性科學家成功因素與性別議題之探討。資優教育研究,8 (1),19-46。
吳淑敏 (2009)。傑出女性科學家生涯發展歷程之探討。特殊教育研究學刊,34 (1),75-103。
李卓夫 (2000)。大學生性別角色刻板印象與兩性平權關係之研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺南市。
李維倫、賴憶嫺 (2009)。現象學方法論:存在行動的投入。中華輔導與諮商學報,25,275-321。
周文祥 (1996)。運動員的生涯規劃。國民體育季刊,3 (25),60-68。
周保男 (2013)。工程女性大學生學習歷程之質性研究:公立教學型大學為例,科技與工程教育學刊,46,1。
林坤誼 (2018)。STEM 教育在台灣推行的現況與省思。青年研究學報,21 (1),1-9。
林幸台 (1984)。我國大學生決策型態與職業決策行為之研究。輔導學報,7,41-66。
林信志 (2011)。高中教科書性別偏見之初探:以各版本高中公民與社會第一冊為例。 教育人力與專業發展雙月刊,6,61-72。
林珮雯 (2017)。新資訊時代的女力關鍵。交大資訊人月刊,國立交通大學資訊學院,19-20。
林義男 (1990)。大學生的學習參與、學習型態與學習成果的關係。國立彰化師範大學輔導學報,13,79-128。
林蔚芳、賴協志、林秀勤 (2012)。社會認知生涯理論模式之文獻回顧。輔導季刊,48 (3),50-63。
金義華(2002)。理工科和文科女大學生性格特徵的差異及成因。山西大學師範學院學報,01。
邱聰傑 (2017)。大學生心理適應狀況-以中華科技大學為例。中華科技大學經營管理研究所,未出版,臺北市。
姚秋鳳 (2017)。高等教育領域之女性概況分析。教育部統計處,教育統計簡訊第88號。
姜瑀青 (2005)。大學資管系女性畢業生生涯規劃與發展之研究-以南部某大學資管系為例。未出版,義守大學資訊管理學系碩士班,高雄市。
洪秀珍、謝臥龍、駱慧文 (2013)。性別刻板印象與數學相關專業發展之研究:以科技大學工程女學生為例。屏東教育大學學報-教育類,40,77-103。
洪秀珍、謝臥龍、駱慧文 (2015)。科技大學女學生「數學領域認同」、「數學性別刻板」、「性別角色刻板」、「情境訊息」與「數學焦慮」之研究。科學與人文研究,3 (3),30-54。
洪瑞璇、曾正宜 (2018)。促進性別容納或再製男性主導?從女性觀點解析專案導向式學習在工程教育中的應用。教育研究集刊,64:2,43-83。
洪潔雯 (2016)。STEM 教育的發展。教師中心傳真第92期。取自:http://www.edb.org.hk/hktc/download/bull/bull92/92.pdf
禹旭才 (2015)。困境與超越:高校女教師發展的社會性別審思。中國社會科學出版社。
胡幼慧、姚美華 (1996)。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例 (141-158)。臺北市:巨流圖書公司。
范斯淳、游光昭 (2016)。科技教育融入STEM 課程的核心價值與實踐。教育科學研究期刊,61 (2),153-183。取自:http://jories.ntnu.edu.tw/jres/Download.aspx?
張仁家、林癸妙 (2019)。美國 STEM 教育的發展沿革與經驗─以俄亥俄州為例。科技與人力教育季刊,1-25。
張汝倫 (1997)。現象學方法的多重含義。哲學雜誌,20,90-115。
張郁雯、林文瑛、王震武 (2013)。科學表現的兩性差異縮小了嗎?-國際科學表現評量資料之探究。教育心理學報,44 (S),459-476。
張雪梅 (1999)。大學教育對學生的衝擊:我國大學生校園經驗與學習成果之實證研究。臺北市,張老師文化。
教育部電子報 (2013)。歐巴馬2014年STEM國家人才培育策略。取自:https://epaper.edu.tw/old/windows.aspx?windows_sn=13415
章珍貞 (2003)。女性大學生寂寞心理經驗之研究。國立高雄師範大學輔導研究所,未出版,高雄市。
陳世哲 (2017)。女性天生不愛競爭?從文化觀點談職場上的性別歧視。經理人雜誌,取自:https://www.managertoday.com.tw/columns/view/54571
陳安琪 (2016)。性別刻板印象威脅效應影響女高中生生涯發展決策之研究,國立高雄師範大學教育學院,性別教育博士學位學程博士論文,高雄市。
陳芬苓 (2004)。科技的空間?性別的空間?教育的空間?--以一所理工大學為例談兩性平等教育的方向,開南管理學院通識教育中心,通識研究集刊,12,175-204。
陳郁涵 (2014)。女大學生性別角色態度、生涯自我效能與婚姻角色期望之相關研究。國立臺北教育大學教育經營與管理學系,未出版,臺北市。
陳皎眉 (2006)。從性別刻板印象威脅談學業表現上的性別差異。認識‧想像臺灣的方法:跨領域研究生交流工作坊。
陳皎眉、孫旻暐 (2006)。從性別刻板印象威脅談學業表現上的性別差異。教育時論,147,19-30。
陳斐柔 (2012)。大學生人際親密能力、寂寞感與憂鬱之關係。國立臺中教育大學諮商與應用心理學系碩士班,未出版,臺中市。
傅大爲、王秀雲 (1996)。台灣女性科學家的九零年代風貌-試析“科學/女性/社會脈絡”諸相關領域。台灣社會研究季刊,22,1-58。
覃明興 (2006)。女性在科學中相對缺席現象探析。柳州師專學報,21 (3),119-122。
鈕文英 (2017)。質性研究方法與論文寫作 (第2版)。臺北市:雙葉書廊。
黃玉 (2000)。大學學生事務的理論基礎─台灣大學生心理社會發展之研究。公民訓育學報,9,161-200。
黃玉 (2003)。她們是如何成長的?多元背景女大學生的校園經驗與心理社會發展歷程之研究。「自強隧道論壇-學生事務與社團輔導」學術研討會論文集 (2-23)。台北市,東吳大學。
黃玉幸 (2014)。科技大學女學生性別經驗之分析-以雙軌班學生為例。正修學報,27,211-228。
黃秀雯、王采薇 (2019)。男女有別,學習表現也有別?國際素養評量結果再思 性別刻板印象威脅,學校行政122期,154-170。
黃幸美 (1995)。數理與科學教育的性別差異之探討。婦女與兩性學刊,6,95-135。
黃政傑、張嘉育 (1998)。消除性別偏見的課程與教學。兩性平等教育季刊,3,25-38。
黃淑玲 (2000)。烏托邦社會主義/馬克思主義女性主義。女性主義理論與流派台北:女書文化,63-64。
黃敦晴 (2018)。發展STEM、STEAM教育,不只要跨科還要跨場域。取自:https://www.commonhealth.com.tw/article/article.action?nid=78302
黃慬韻 (2015)。大學生生涯探索、自我認同狀態與心理幸福感之關係研究。國立屏東大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士班,未出版,屏東市。
黃雅苑 (2010)。國小男性教師性別意識形塑經驗與教學實踐之研究。未出版,國立臺中教育大學社會科教育學系碩士班,臺中市。
黃囇莉 (2001)。臺灣傑出女性科技人才的成長經驗─自傳式敘說之研究取徑。臺北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
楊巧玲 (2005)。性別化的興趣與能力:高中學生類組選擇之探究,臺灣教育社會學研究,5 (2),113-153。
楊雅婷 (2018)。創新數位經濟帶動女性科技菁英崛起。取自:https://www.italent.org.tw/ePaperD/13/ePaper20180500005
溫金豐、崔來意 (2001)。高科技公司女性專業人員工作-家庭衝突及工作倦怠之研究:社會支持的效應。管理評論,20 (4),65-91。
萬一、金蕾蒞、林成濤、胡德鑫 (2018)。工學女博士的學術職業去向和層次—基於清華大學2005-2014年博士畢業生的分析研究生教育研究。研究生教育研究,45 (3),4。
熊會、仝雪 (2006)。理工科教育中的性别偏見問题,成都大學學報 (社會科學版), 1,105-106。
劉金源、蔡順美、唐文慧、葉麗貞 (2006)。研究型大學通識教育評鑑結果之剖析暨檢討與改進。通識學刊:理念與實務,1,263-302。
劉淑雯、蔡易儒 (2017)。性別平等教育之推動對女性科技人才培育的影響。教育脈動學刊,9,5-12。
劉淑鈴 (2000)。大學理工科系畢業之女性生涯轉變歷程之探究。未出版,屏東師範學院教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文,屏東縣。
劉淑蓉 (2007)。中學科學與數學教師對學校環境知覺之比較研究。科學教育學刊,15 (1),53-72。
潘慧玲、林昱貞 (2000)。性別平等教育的概念與落實。未出版,國立臺灣師範大學教育學系,台北市。
潘慧玲、黃馨慧 (2003)。婦女與教育。婦女權益報告書 (78-115)。台北:財團法人婦女權益促進發展基金會。
蔡麗玲 (2004)。性別中立?談科學裡的性別。婦研縱橫季刊,70,23-27。
蔡麗玲 (2007)。科學不只需要女性,更需要女性主義者。知識通訊評論,62,65-65。
蔡麗玲 (2017)。關注科技領域的性別平等—從性別偏見到性別意識。臺灣社會學會通訊,86,24-26。
駐休士頓辦事處教育組 (2016)。女性擠不進STEM行業 就因為放棄了這堂課。取自:https://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5078475
駐洛杉磯辦事處教育組 (2018)。理工教育中兩性不平等的問題探討。教育部電子報818期。
駐美國代表處教育組 (2013)。歐巴馬2014年STEM國家人才培育策略。取自:https://fepaper.naer.edu.tw/index.php?edm_no=35&content_no=1883
韓采燕(2009)。性別化的實驗室:陽剛氣質與科技實作。清華大學社會學研究所學位論文。2009。1-139。
盧昭蓉 (2001)。性別影響之學習行為差異研究-以國立科學工藝博物館為例。科技博物5 (4),82-93。
蕭佳純、涂志賢 (2012)。於大學生就業力發展之縱貫性分析。教育研究集刊,58 (1),1-37。
親子天下 (2018)。從美國白宮發動的教改,為什麼STEM、STEAM 教育這麼重要?取自: https://flipedu.parenting.com.tw/article/4895
謝臥龍 (2004)。女性主義思潮下性別權力關係重構的省思。知識型構中性別與權力的思想與辯證。臺北:唐山,1-14。
謝臥龍 (2014)。由女性主義理論發展的理路來分析性別工作平等法的本土實踐與反思,台灣心理諮商季刊,6 (3),15-32。
謝臥龍、駱慧文與吳雅玲 (1999)。從性別平等的教育的觀點來探討高雄地區國小課堂中師生互動的關係,教育研究資訊雙月刊,7 (1),57-80。
謝淑敏 (2014)。角色楷模學習輔導方案應用於科技領域大學生之成效研究。教育研究與發展期刊,10 (4),47-78。
謝淑敏 (2016)。科技領域女大學生堅持科學課程的動機及其生涯價值觀之探究,輔導與諮商學報,38 (1),1-28。
簡晉龍、任宗浩 (2011)。邁向科學之路?臺灣中學生性別對科學生涯選擇意向之影響。科學教育學刊,19 (5),461-481。
簡瑋成 (2018)。美國科技教育之發展趨勢。國家教育研究院電子報第 183期。
羅玉容(2005)。學校經驗對大學生自我認同發展影響之探討。未出版,東海大學教育研究所:碩士論文,臺中市。
羅良慧 (2018)。由科技融入教育趨勢初探STEM教育的驅動力。國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心,取自: https://portal.stpi.narl.org.tw/index/article/10429
蘇芊玲 (1997)。從教材看女性的教育處境。婦女國會議次論壇報告。
行政院 (2017)。性別平等政策綱領。行政院性別平等會。取自:
https://gec.ey.gov.tw/Page/FD420B6572C922EA

二、英文部分
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college: four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Bach, Deborah. (2016). Why do some STEM fields have fewer women than others? UW study may have the answer.University of Washington website.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84 (2) , 191-215.
Bergen , D. J., & Williams , J. E. (1991). Sex stereotype in the United States revisited:1972-1988. Sex Role, 24, 413-423.
Bernhard Ertl, Silke Luttenberger & Manuela Paechter (2017). The Impact of Gender Stereotypes on the Self-Concept of Female Students in STEM Subjects with an Under-Representation of Females. Front Psychol. Retrieved From:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00703/full
Betz, N. E. & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28 (5) , 399-410.
Chickering A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993) . Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Corinne A. Moss-Racusin, Christina Sanzari, Nava Caluori & Helena Rabasco (2018). Gender Bias Produces Gender Gaps in STEM Engagement. Retrieved From:https://scinapse.io/papers/2792209632
Craig Newmark (2016). Let's get real about supporting women in tech,Recode.net.
Development, 32 (3) , 197-206.
Debra L. Oswald , Maha Baalbaki(2015).Breaking Barriers: Engaging and Retaining Women in STEM. American Psychological Association. Vol. 60, No. 2, Article 4
Eccles, J. S. (1984). Sex differences in achievement patterns. Nebraska Symposium Motivation, 32,97-132.
Eileen Pollack (2014).Why Are There Still So Few Women in Science? The New York Times.
Farmer, H. S. (1997). Women who persisted in their high school aspirations for careers in science or technology. Women’s mental health & development, Vol. 2.
Faulkner, W. (2009). Doing Gender in Engineering Workplace Cultures: Part I — Observations from the Field. Engineering Studies, 1 (1) . 3-18.
Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000). The Five Sexes, Revisited. The Sciences, 40 (4) , 18-23.
Fausto-Sterling, A. (2012). The Dynamic Development of Gender Variability. Journal of Homosexuality, 59, 398-421.
Felicia M. Moore (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature.
Funk, Cary, Parker, Kim (2018). Women and Men in STEM Often at Odds Over Workplace Equity. Pew Research Center .Retrieved from: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/women-and-men-in-stem-often-at-odds-over-workplace-equity/
Gayles, Joy Gaston; Ampaw, Frim(2014).The Impact of College Experiences on Degree Completion in STEM Fields at Four-Year Institutions: Does Gender Matter? Journal of Higher Education,85(4) , 439-468.
Hendruk, A. (2015). Gender inequality in the sciences ? It’s still very present in Canada. Maclean’s. Retrieved from :http://www.macleans.ca/society/science/gender-inequality-in-the-sciences-its-still-very-present-in-canada/
Kawczynski, K. A. (2009). The college sophomore student experience: A phenomenological study of a second year program: University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Kessler, S. (1990). The Medical Construction of Gender: Case Management of Intersexed Infants. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 16 (1) , 3-25.
Kim (2011). Do Female and Male Role Models Who Embody STEM Stereotypes Hinder Women Anticipated Success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science , 2 (6) : 656-664.
LA Støren (‎2007). Women’s and men’s choice of higher education—what explains the persistent sex segregation in Norway?
LeFevre, J. A., Kulak, A.G., & Heymans, S. L. (1992). Factorys influencing the selection of university majors varying in mathematical content. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 24 (3) , 276-289.
Lewis, Danielle (2017). High school students shadow Wise women. University at Buffalo website.
Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (1996). Social cognitive approach to career development : An overview. The Career Development Quarterly, 44 (4) , 310-321.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45 (1) , 79-122.
Lorelle L. Espinosa (2008). The Academic Self-Concept Of Afican American And Lorelle L. Espinosa (2008). Latina Men And Women In STEM Majors. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. Volume 14. Retrieved From:http://www.dl.begellhouse.com/journals/00551c876cc2f027,3929546847fc48d0,3770c4f77f729e57.html?fbclid=IwAR3KHqUFHHnyXVNPPv2D-Ztu2gkv0kbvh62wOYX1yQFGv9mf8a8dFB0zeLI
M. Gail Jones (‎2000). Gender Differences in Students’ Experiences, Interests, and Attitudes toward Science and Scientists .
Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of personality and social psychology, 3 (5) , 551-558.
Mary A. Hermann (2015). African-American Women's Experiences in Graduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education at a Predominantly White University: A Qualitative Investigation.
Meyer,I. (2003). Prejudice as Stress: Conceptual and Measurement Problems. American Journal of Public Health, 93 (2) , 262-265.
Michele Hoffmann (2019). Opinion: 10 Ways to Support New Mothers in STEM. The scientist website.
National Girls Collaborative Project (2018). Statistics. Retrieved from : https://ngcproject.org/statistics
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) (2016). The National Artificial Intelligence Research and Development Strategic Plan. Retrieved from: https://www.nitrd.gov/PUBS/national_ai_rd_strategic_plan.pdf
National Science Foundation (NSF) (2007). A National Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the U.S. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education System. Retrieved from: https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2007/stem_action.pdf
Nealon, Cory (2018). New program to help women in STEM overcome gender discrimination. University of Washington website.
Next Generation Science Standards (2013). DCI Arrangements of the next Generation science standards. Retrieved from: https://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/default/files/NGSS%20DCI%20Combined%2011.6.13.pdf
Nilanjana Dasgupta, Jane G. Stout (2014).Girls and Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: STEMing the Tide and Broadening Participation in STEM Careers. Sage journals . Retrieved from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2372732214549471
Nichole A Broderick (2019). Meta-Research: Gender inequalities among authors who contributed equally.University of Connecticut, United States, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, United States.
Nikki Graf Ruchard Fry And Cary Funk (2018). 7 facts about the STEM workforce. The Pew Research Center website.
Oswald D.L.& Harvey, R.D. (2003). A Q-Methodological Study of Women's Subjective Perspectives on Mathematics. Sex Roles, 49 (3-4) , 133-142
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) (2016). Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence. Retrieved from: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf
Rose M. Marra ,Kelly A. Rodgers .& Demei Shen Barbara Bogue(2013).Women Engineering Students and Self‐Efficacy: A Multi‐Year, Multi‐Institution Study of Women Engineering Student Self‐Efficacy. Wiley Online Library. Retrieved from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01003.x
Jianxia Du, Xun Ge, Jianzhong Xu.(2014) .Online collaborative learning activities: The perspectives of African American female students. Sciencedirect website. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S036013151400267X
Jones, M.G., Howe, A., and Rua, M.J.(2000).Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests and attitudes toward science and scientists, Sci. Educ., vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 180–192, 2000.
Kurup, P. M., Li, X., Powell, G., & Brown, M. (2019). Building future primary teachers’ capacity in STEM: based on a platform of beliefs, understandings and intentions. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0164-5
RM Marra (‎2009). Women Engineering Students and Self‐Efficacy: A Multi‐Year, Multi‐Institution Study of Women Engineering Student Self‐Efficacy.
Stephan, W.G. and Stephan, C.W. (1996). Predicting prejudice. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 409–426.
Sadker, M.P., & Sadker, D.M. (1982). Sex Equity Handbook for Schools.New York,N.Y.: Longman.
Sally Patten (2019). No respect: STEM jobs 'spit women out' .Financial Review website. Retrieved from: https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/careers/no-respect-stem-jobs-spit-women-out-20190826-p52kxk
Sapna Cheryan, Sianna A. Ziegler, Amanda K. Montoya, Lily Jiang (2016). Why Are Some STEM Fields More Gender Balanced Than Others? Psychological Bulletin.
Schiebinger, L. (1999). Has Feminism Changed Science? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Stangor, C. & Sechrist, G. B. (1998). Conceptualizing the determinants of academic choice and task performance across social groups. In C. Stangor & J. K.
Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women's self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,100(2), 255–270.
Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2015). Sex differences in academic achievement are not related to political, economic, or social equality. Retrieved From: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289614001688?via%3Dihub
Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2018). The gender-equality paradox in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Psychological Science, 29, 581-593.
Sudeshna Dasgupta (2017). Inadequate representation of women in STEM research: The "leaky pipeline". Retrieved From: https://www.editage.com/insights/inadequate-representation-of-women-in-stem-research-the-leaky-pipeline
Super, D. E. (1953). A theory of vocational development. American Psychologist. 8,185-190.
Super, D. E. (1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 16,282-298. Super, D. E. 1984. Creating a career development center.HR Focus. 11-12.
Super, D. E. (1990). A life span, life-space approach to career development. Career choice and development. 197-261. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
StonyerH. (2002) Making engineering students - making women: the discursive context of engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 18 (4), 392-399.
Sabrina Sobierajand Nicole C. Krämer (2019).The Impacts of Gender and Subject on Experience of Competence and Autonomy in STEM. frontiersin website. Retrieved from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01432/full
The Hostility Leak in the STEM Pipeline (2017). Retaining Postdoctoral Researchers with Families. National Postdoctoral Association.9.
The White House of Science and Technology Policy (2018). Summary of the 2018 White House State-Federal STEM Education Summit. Retrieved from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Summary-of-the-2018-White-House-State-Federal-STEM-Education-Summit.pdf
Thieke, W. S. (1994). A model of developmental change in freshman students:
confirming Chickering's theory of student development. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Syracuse University.
Tokar, D. M., Thompson, M. N., Plaufcan, M. R., & Williams, C. M. (2007). Precursors of learning experiences in Social Cognitive Career Theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71(3), 319–339.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National) ,Washington.
White House (2016). Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy. Retrieved from: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/documents/Artificial-Intelligence-Automation-Economy.PDF
Wynn AT, Correll SJ. (2018). Puncturing the pipeline: Do technology companies alienate women in recruiting sessions? Social Studies of Science, 48(1) , 149-164.







 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top

相關論文

無相關論文
 
* *