preferred to explore feelings, solve problems, and work cooperatively and interactively at
the computer. They also preferred adventure, friendship or creativity as the focus of
software (AAUW, 2000; Fiore, 1999). And finally, male teachers used computers more
than female teachers at the elementary, secondary, and university levels (Hattie &
Fitzgerald, 1987). Therefore students lacked female role models in this domain.
Gender stereotyping attitudes are very prevalent. When surveying 1,600 kindergarten
through grade 12 students, Wilder, Mackie, and Cooper (1985) found that both boys and
girls considered computers as more appropriate for males than females. When asked to
draw a computer user, both boys and girls were more likely to draw boys/men in this role
(Martin, Heller, and Mahmoud, 1992). Gender stereotypes were reinforced by parents,
peers, and the educational system (Walkerdine (1990).
This cultural gender bias is found extensively in advertising and is perpetuated through
advertising (Gooler, 1986; Nye, 1991). Although this trend has begun to change in the
last five years, technology advertising is more likely to picture a male “computer nerd” or
“computer geek” than a female computer scientist. Similarly, computer users tend to be
pictured as females. The perception that males are programmers and females are users is
captured well in Figures 1 and 2 below.
I want the ability to see my code and design at the same time.
I want the strength to design freely without browser and integration issues.
I want the knowledge to do what I need to do without the learning curve.
Dreamweaver 4. It’s not just an upgrade. It’s more power to you.
Figure 1: Dreamweaver Advertisement
Text: XP called an operating system even your mother would
love.
Implication: We, the male computer scientists, have made XP so
simple even a woman can use it.
Figure 2: Microsoft News Event
This lack of female-in-control of technology examples, coupled with the plethora of
female-needing-help using computers examples deters girls from exploring computers
and computer-related careers. One further deterrent for females is the use of sex as an
advertising tool, as pictured in Figure 3, which uses a nude female figure to advertise a
Palm Pilot.
Figure 3: Palm Pilot Advertisement
Kramer and Lehman (1990) contended that the male-as-computer-programmer image
was accurate when computers were nothing more than number-crunching machines.
With the rapid changes and advancements in technology, however, the presumption that
maleness and computers are closely related domains contributes to an “increasingly
inaccurate portrayal” (p.170) of computer use in the 1990 and 2000s. Hoyles (1988)
summed up this tendency succinctly: “computers tend to be conceptually assimilated to
the category of science, mathematics, and technology and acquire some of the traditional
qualities of differentiated interest amongst boys and girls” (p. 10). This outdated view of
computers, which disadvantages any “non-logical” person, and women are perceived to
be highly represented in this category, serves to reinforce the bias that women are less
competent and confident with computers than males.
Turkle and Papert (1990) called for a new social construction of the computer to
contribute to our understanding of the ways males and females think about and use
computers. After reviewing ten years of research on gender, ethnicity, and social class
differences in the uses of computers in K-12 classrooms, Sutton (1991) concluded that
there is a need to more fully understand the complexities of inequities in computer use is
schools. This paper answers these calls.
Project Description
The focus of this study was not to further investigate the perceived gender gap
surrounding technology, but rather to address the meanings that adolescents assign to
computers as they interact with them. Since our culture is experiencing evolving and
changing gender roles, and, since the computer culture within educational settings is
evolving and changing, it is appropriate that this study addresses how today’s adolescents
view and use computers within an educational setting.
In my role as teacher/researcher, I team-taught a technology-rich social science unit to
250 middle school students. My teammate (a seventh- and eighth-grade Language
Arts/Social Studies teacher) and I worked with each group of 25-30 students for
approximately eight to ten hours in four separate sessions. Our classes took place in a
computer lab, so each student had access to a computer. Despite this one-to-one ratio of
computers to students, students frequently collaborated both on and off the computer.
The classroom was structured around seventh and eighth grade Language Arts and Social
Studies standards that focused on problem solving, critical thinking, reading, writing,
viewing and presenting. Technology was the tool that helped us integrate student
learning. In our classroom, we used a student-centered approach that views learning as a
social process, and learners as active participants in their learning and therefore
responsible for their own learning paths. Students constructed individual knowledge in an
environment that featured collaboration as well as feedback from peers and teachers. Our
classroom was grounded in the following principles:
• Learning is an active process facilitated by an environment that encourages risk-
taking, creative thinking, and critical thinking;
• Teachers create such environments to facilitate learning and to provide
opportunities for self-reflection and self-evaluation;
• Learning is social and is fostered by collaboration;
• Learners learn by doing within specific contexts;
• Learning is reflective and incorporates feedback from teachers and peers;
• Students and teachers learn through their mistakes; and
• Technology is a tool to facilitate learning and is NOT the focus of
learning.
Methodology
This paper describes a university-middle school partnership involving 250 middle school
students from twelve schools. Students were bussed to a nearby urban university where
students had ready access to computers and the Internet so they could complete a web-
based unit on cloning. The unit was team-taught by a middle school teacher and a
university professor. The students benefited from access to technology and the university
professor was able to conduct a qualitative research study on gender and technology with
these middle school students.
Students’ mean age was 12.5 years. The project participants were approximately 50%
males, 50% females. Students were:
• 75% Caucasian
• 18% Hispanic
• 5% Asian American
• 1% African American
• 1% Native American
Data sources included: open-ended student surveys about students’ uses of and attitudes
toward technology, open-ended parental surveys about parents’ uses of and attitudes
toward technology, observational data and field notes, documents created by students,
and student responses from structured focus groups.
Students and their parents completed surveys (See Appendices A and B) prior to the start
of the project. Observations and associated field notes and digital photographs were
recorded throughout the project. Student products and reflective logs were collected at
every step of the project. At the completion of the project, a number of structured focus
groups were conducted with the students. Focus group responses were recorded and
transcribed.
All data were analyzed using a constant comparison method, not in the sense that Glaser
and Strauss (1967) use this method to derive theory, but simply to sort through and
process my data. I recursively used the first two steps that Glaser and Strauss suggest
that researchers follow:
1. compare incidents applicable to each category
2. integrate categories and their properties
In terms of my general approach to data analysis, I first looked through the raw data for
divisions along gender lines. But my examination did not stop there, as I considered no
gender difference as interesting as gender differences. I noted same-gender and cross-
gender interactions in an effort to understand how these adolescents viewed and used
computers. I followed the model of Gilligan (1982) who presents female and male voices
to highlight the differences between two ways of viewing experiences rather than
suggesting generalizations about either gender.
Findings
All of the adolescent girls and boys in this study were competent, confident and frequent
users of computers, computer software, and the Internet. Despite their equivalent
competence, confidence and frequency of use, girls and boys viewed and used computers
differently. Each gender seemed to accept this as a natural part of their culture, and, in
general, was accepting of each other’s visions and uses.
In terms of definitions, girls saw the computer as much more multi-dimensional then did
boys. The phrase “it's whatever you want it to be” best captures this understanding.
Girls defined computers as multi-use tools that facilitate connecting with friends, doing
homework and research, gathering information, solving math problems, organizing ideas
and information, producing more professional products, and accomplishing a multitude of
tasks in a quicker, easier way. Boys, on the other hand, had a more narrow view of
computers. Boys identified computers as machines, toys, or high tech calculators that let
you do things quicker and easier. It is interesting that no girls used the terms machine or
toy in defining the computer. Rather, they focused on what the computer allowed them
to accomplish. The major foci for girls, in order of importance, were computer as
communication tool, computer as productivity tool, and computer as multi-purpose tool.
The major foci for boys, in order of importance, were a machine for entertainment and
gaming, a thinking machine, and an information machine.
In terms of general use, girls utilized computers to connect with others, and boys used
computers to compete with others. Girls' most predominant uses centered around
communication: emailing friends and family, chatting with friends, making new friends,
using instant messaging to communicate daily with classmates, and connecting to and
flirting with guys. Boys' most predominant uses centered on competitive, often violent,
gaming activities such as war games and killing simulations, and sporting games. In
terms of school-related use, girls focused on the numerous ways they used computers,
including word processing, creating multimedia presentations, writing multiple drafts of
papers, and producing neat, professional looking work. Boys, however, mentioned that
they used computers for homework and schoolwork only now and then, and the only tool
they mentioned was the Internet.
In terms of Internet use, each gender identified several uses not mentioned by the other
gender. Girls said they used the Internet to shop or browse for fashion ideas. They also
focused on using the Internet to flirt with guys or see pictures of "handsome hunks." Most
girls played computer games not at all or only when they were very, very bored. They
then elaborated that they thought computers games were bad influences on their male
classmates because gaming made the boys into anti-social couch potatoes who didn't
know how to communicate with their female classmates. Boys mentioned using the
Internet to look up codes for various games that would allow them to move to the next
level of the game. And several boys mentioned their sophisticated use of computers to
create FTP sites for other gamers to find codes and secrets for popular software and
Internet games.
An interesting and unexpected trend that I discovered when analyzing data was that girls
used more exact language to describe computer use than did boys. For example, boys
said they used computers for homework; girls specified that that used word processing,
PowerPoint™ and the Internet to do homework. Boys called the computer a machine that
allows you to look up stuff, while girls said it was a resource tool for learning. Boys were
less specific about their uses than girls. For example, boys never mentioned how they did
homework, while girls mentioned how they used word processors to do multiple drafts
and how using the computer made their work look neater and more professional. And
even though both boys and girls mentioned the convenience of computers, they chose
different language to express this idea. Boys used the generic “it” when they said “it let's
you do things quicker and easier;’ girls identified the computer as a tool when they said
“it's a tool that helps you work quicker.”
Figure 4 delineates the exact phrases adolescent girls and boys used to define the term
computer.
Girls’ Definitions
Something to keep you connected to your friends
It helps you communicate with others
A machine that does things that you tell it to do
A lot of stuff combined into one thing to make life easier
A gateway to information
It can substitute for a book because it contains so much information
It organizes and stores your thoughts
It's a resource tool for learning things
It can communicate, it can do problems in math and it can write
It improves your everyday life
A tool that makes your work look neater and more professional
A tool that helps you work quicker
It’s whatever you want it to be
Boys’ Definitions
A machine with a CPU and a motherboard and circuits
A high tech calculator, a giant calculator
A machine that does what you program it to do
A machine that thinks for you
A machine that processes information and stores it
A toy for people to have for entertainment
A machine that does things faster than a human can
A machine that allows you to look up stuff
It let's you do things quicker and easier.
Figure 4: Adolescent Girls’ and Boys’ Definition of “Computer”
Figure 5 delineates the exact phrases adolescent girls and boys used to describe how they
used the computer.
Girls’ Uses of Computers
Word processing for homework and research
Word processing for writing process to easily do lots of drafts
PowerPoint™ presentations for classes
Email to talk to friends both locally and at a distance
Chat rooms to keep in touch with friends and make new friends
Instant messaging to talk to classmates
Email to talk to guys and flirt with guys
Games to play if I'm really, really bored, like PacMan or Solitaire
Definitely NOT for games
The Internet to shop or "window shop"
Boys’ Uses of Computers
Mainly for fun, maybe some homework now and then
To play games (Solitaire, casino games, sporting games, logic games, simulations
where you kill people, war games)
Entertainment 24 hours a day
The Internet for information to do homework
The Internet for Nintendo codes
Run an FTP from my computer that's up 24 hours a day
Figure 5: Adolescent Girls’ and Boys’ Uses of the Computer
There are a number of stereotypes that seem less strong than they once were. For
example, as illustrated in Figure 6, males are more likely to take control of the mouse
than are females, but some females are comfortable taking control of the mouse.
Figure 6: Breaking Gender Stereotypes Regarding Mouse Control
As shown in Figure 7, females enjoy and use collaboration for computer-based
assignments, but males also enjoy and use collaboration as a learning tool.
Figure 7: Breaking Gender Stereotypes Regarding Collaboration
And there was evidence of the evolving, often confusing, gender roles of girls and
women in the world of computers, as shown in Figure 8.
“I’m fourteen years old and all’s I’m
interested in is boys. I’m not
SUPPOSED to be interested in
computers and the Internet and stuff
like that.”
“I can’t believe it! I’m
really enjoying using the
computer!”
Figure 8: Evolving Gender Roles Regarding Computers
Implications for Classroom Practice
The gender differences surrounding technology are not differences in competence,
confidence, or frequency of use. Instead, the differences lie in how adolescent girls and
boys view computers and the way they choose to use them. It is imperative, then, that K-
12 teachers understand that the culture of computer use in schools is changing, and that
females are embracing technology in numerous new ways as computes evolve into a
more versatile and complex tools that can be used in a wide variety of ways depending on
the user.
Because there is a pervasive perception that the computer domain is male, parents and
teachers need to work to disrupt the stereotypically gendered character of technology. In
general, technological use is often dictated by a rigid gender ideology: vacuum cleaners,
washing machines, and electric typewriters are for women; power saws, tractors and
household tools are for men. But computers, although far from neutral, offer a way to
interrupt and re-define gender differences. Technological advancements have changed
both the computer and the image of the computer. Computers are no longer simply
number crunchers; they are now multifaceted technologies that facilitate unlimited
opportunities in application, use and vision. Men may have aligned themselves with a
number crunching computer in the past; but the newer image of computer as more
complexly functional opens the door to differently gendered use. In fact, this study
stands as firm evidence that girls are aligning themselves with computers and are using
computers to defy long-standing gender stereotypes.
A delineation of classroom strategies that will ensure that both girls and boys use
computers in ways that enhance learning and growth is the topic for another article. The
first step, however, is raising teachers’ consciousness about the inherent disadvantage
girls have in the computer domain. Helping teachers become more aware of issues
surrounding girls and computers can make a difference. A group of 240 teachers
attending the Carnegie Mellon Summer Institute from 1997 to 1999 were trained in
“gender equity instruction that would increase the numbers of girls taking high school
computer science” (Margolis & Fisher, 2002, p. 109). These teachers reported the
following changes as a result of the institute:
• Teachers were more aware of their own behavior that disadvantaged girls;
• Teachers made a greater effort to call on everyone in the classroom, not just the
boys;
• Teachers personally made greater efforts to recruit girls into high school computer
science classes;
• Teachers had a better idea of how to work with girls;
• Teachers worked harder to retain girls in their classes;
• Teachers encouraged girls now; and
• Teachers considered issues of gender equity more (Margolis & Fisher, 2002).
Implications for Future Research
Turkle and Papert (1990) called for a new social construction of the computer as well as
feminist scholarship to contribute to our understanding of the ways males and females
think about and use computers. I created, within my classroom, a micro-culture that
encouraged new social constructions of the computer and the computer culture by both
boys and girls. By closely examining the interface of girls and computers, and boys and
computers, I was able to gain insights into how each gender views and uses computers.
This study breaks ground for future studies to create, and simultaneously study, computer
cultures that honor female and male ways of knowing and that allow the research
community to begin to break down gender stereotypes and the idea of one privileged
(usually male) way of thinking about computers.