Collaborative Research : Improving the teaching of genetics in high school to avoid instilling misconceptions about gender differences

最近的研究表明，在高中生物课上学习遗传学可以导致一种信念，即男性和女性基因和大脑的内在差异是导致性别行为和智力差异的主要原因（一种被称为神经遗传学本质主义的信念）。这种信念会降低女孩对自己的STEM能力的感觉，她们在STEM课程中的归属感，以及她们在STEM领域继续接受教育的兴趣。这个项目由生物科学课程研究、德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校和纽约大学的一组研究人员领导，他们的目标是回答有关如何在高中水平上以科学准确的方式教授遗传学的重要问题，但不会产生这些有害的副作用。具体来说，这条新的实验研究路线将确定——并修改——普通遗传学教学中促进神经遗传学本质主义信仰的内容。提出的实验还将探讨同伴和教师的信念如何影响学生这种信念的变化。这项工作对如何在高中生物教育中解决男女差异的话题有进一步的影响。此外，研究结果将推动有关导致STEM态度和愿望性别差异因素的理论。该项目由EHR核心研究（ECR）项目资助，该项目支持推进STEM学习基础研究文献的工作，并由Discovery Research PreK-12 （DRK12）项目共同资助。在初步证据的基础上，该项目旨在实现四个关键目标。首先，该项目将研究遗传学教学的哪些具体方面会影响学生对神经遗传学本质主义的信念。其次，该项目将确定这些影响发生的认知机制。第三，该项目将揭示修订后的遗传学教材对与STEM追求相关的广泛动机变量的下游影响，如内隐人理论、STEM归属感和对该领域的兴趣。第四，该项目将探索可能调节或调节学生对教学材料的反应的情境因素（例如，教师和同伴的信念）。该研究小组将开发并不断完善遗传学教材，教授性别内部和性别之间的遗传、神经和行为差异，以及这些差异的社会原因。然后，研究小组将通过两项大规模随机对照试验来测试这些修订后的材料的有效性，一项是直接针对学生的，另一项是针对学生通过教师学习的。该项目的结果将产生关于导致STEM性别差异的认知、社会学和教育因素的概括性知识。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Recent research suggests that learning about genetics during high school biology can lead to a belief that inherent differences in the genes and brains of men and women are the main causes of gender differences in behavior and intellectual abilities (a belief known as neurogenetic essentialism). This belief is implicated in lowering girls’ sense of their own STEM abilities, their feelings of belonging in STEM classes, and their interest in pursuing further education in STEM fields. The goal of this project, led by a team of researchers at Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, the University of Texas, Austin, and New York University is to answer important questions about how to teach genetics at the high school level in a manner that is scientifically accurate, but does not have these detrimental side effects. Specifically, this new line of experimental research will identify—and revise—the content in common genetics instruction that promotes the belief in neurogenetic essentialism. The proposed experiments will also explore how the beliefs of peers and teachers contribute to changes in such beliefs in students. This work has further implications for how the topic of differences between men and women is addressed during high school biology education. Furthermore, the research findings will advance theory on factors that contribute to gender disparities in STEM attitudes and aspirations. The project is funded by the EHR Core Research (ECR) program, which supports work that advances the fundamental research literature on STEM learning, with co-funding by the Discovery Research PreK-12 (DRK12) program. Building on preliminary evidence, this project aims to accomplish four key goals. First, the project will study which specific aspects of genetics instruction affect students’ beliefs in neurogenetic essentialism. Second, the project will identify the cognitive mechanisms through which these effects occur. Third, the project will uncover the downstream effects of revised genetics instructional materials on a broad range of motivational variables relevant to STEM pursuit, such as implicit person theories, sense of belonging in STEM, and interest in this domain. Fourth, the project will explore the contextual factors (e.g., teacher and peer beliefs) that may moderate or mediate how students respond to the instructional materials. The research team will develop and iteratively refine genetics educational materialsthat teach about genetic, neurological, and behavioral variation within and between sexes, as well as the social causes of such differences. The research team will then test the effectiveness of these revised materials through two large-scale randomized control trials, one targeting students directly and one targeting students’ learning via their teachers. The results of this project will produce generalizable knowledge regarding the cognitive, sociological, and educational factors that contribute to STEM gender disparities.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.