Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Nov 7, 2025
Abstract
This study examines the pedagogical potential of working with biographies of women scientists to enable male upper-secondary students to identify and critically reflect on gender stereotypes in science. The study adopted a qualitative approach with a case-study design and implemented a brief workshop-based educational intervention with 35 students from a single-sex public high school in Santiago. Working in small groups, participants analyzed the biographies of three active Chilean women scientists and responded to guiding questions. Group responses were audio-recorded, transcribed, and subjected to qualitative content analysis using both deductive and inductive categories.
Findings indicate that male students recognize masculine normativity as a criterion of legitimacy in science and identify persistent gender stereotypes, including: (i) the association of science with culturally masculinized attributes (brilliance, rationality, competitiveness); (ii) the invisibility and under-recognition of women’s contributions— including citation, funding, and pay gaps; (iii) the perceived incompatibility between motherhood and a scientific career; and (iv) the portrayal of science as a patriarchal space governed by masculinized codes.
We conclude that using biographies of active Chilean women scientists constitutes an effective resource for promoting male students’ identification, reflection, and critical problematization of gender stereotypes in science.
References
Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago: Rand MacNally
Bonder, G. (2015). Hacia la Innovación de la Educación Científica y Tecnológica con Enfoque de Género. Cátedra Regional UNESCO Mujer, Ciencia y Tecnología en América Latina, UNESCO.
Camacho, J. (2013). Concepciones sobre ciencia y género en el profesorado de química: aproximaciones desde un estudio colectivo de casos. Ciência y Educação, 19, 323-338. https:// doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132013000200007
Camacho- González, J. (2019). Mujeres y Ciencias: Biografía de científicas en Chile elaboradas por y para estudiantes. En M. Quintanilla-Gatica y N. Solsona (Comps.), Mujeres, educación y ciencia en América Latina. Aportes teóricos y prácticos para el profesorado (pp. 165-188). Bellaterra.
Carli, L. L., Alawa, L., Lee, Y., Zhao, B., & Kim, E. (2016). Stereotypes about gender and science: Women ≠ scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 244–260.
Castillo-Mayén, R., & Montes-Berges, B. (2014). Análisis de los estereotipos de género actuales. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 30(3), 1044-1060
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
CONICYT. (2017). Política institucional equidad de género en ciencia y tecnología. Período 2017-2025.https://s3.amazonaws.com/documentos.anid.cl/documentos-y-servicios/equidad-en-ctci/politica-institucional-de-equidad-de-genero/Politica-Institucional-Equidad-de-Genero-en-CyT-Periodo-2017_2025.pdf
Danielsson, A., Avraamidou, L. & Gonsalves, A. (2023). Gender Matters. Building on the Past, Recognizing the Present, and Looking Toward the Future. In N. Lederman, D. Zeidler, & J. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Volume III) (pp. 263-290). Lawrence Erlbaum
Deemer, E. D., Thoman, D. B., Chase, J. P., & Smith, J. L. (2014). Feeling the threat: Stereotype threat as acontextual barrier to women’s science career choice intentions. Journal of Career Development, 41(2), 141–158.
Diekman, A. B. y Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171-1188.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W. y Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2004). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: Implications for the partner preferences of women and men. En A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall y R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Psychology of Gender (2ª ed., pp. 269-295). Nueva York: Guilford.
Eliasson, N., Sørensen, H., & Karlsson, K. G. (2016). Teacher student interaction in contemporary science classrooms: Is participation still a question of gender? International Journal of Science Education, 38(10), 1655–1672.
Glick, P. y Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109-118
Jiménez-Moya, G., Carvacho, H., & Álvarez, B. (2020). Azul y rosado: la (aún presente) trampa de los estereotipos de género. MIDevi-Dencias, 23, 1-9.
Leslie, S.-J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219), 262–265.
Lewis, J., Schneegans, S., & Straza, T. (2021). UNESCO Science Report: The race against time for smarter development (Vol. 2021). Unesco Publishing.
Martínez Labrín, S., & Urrutia, B. B. (2013). Los estereotipos en la comprensión de las desigualdades de género en educación, desde la psicología feminista. Psicologia & Sociedade, 25, 549-558.
Meyer, M., Cimpian, A., & Leslie, S.-J. (2015). Women are underrepresented in felds where success is believed to require brilliance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 235.
Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología, Conocimiento e Innovación. (2023). Radiografía de género en la ciencia en Chile. https://www.minciencia.gob.cl/uploads/filer_public/db/2a/db2a5829-717d-49e2-b090-2c4a3301d4c3/2023_radiografia_genero_vf.pdf
Moya, M. (2003). El análisis psicosocial del género. En J. F. Morales y C. Huici (Eds.), Estudios de Psicología Social (pp. 175-221). Madrid: UNED.
OCDE. (2017), “Chile”, in Education at a Glance 2017: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2017-42-en
Pinto, J. E. M. (2018). Metodología de la investigación social: Paradigmas: cuantitativo, sociocrítico, cualitativo, complementario. Ediciones de la U.
Reilly, D., Neumann, D. L., & Andrews, G. (2019). Investigating gender differences in mathematics and science: Results from the 2011 Trends in Mathematics and Science Survey. Research in Science Education, 49(1), 25–50.
Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Scantlebury, K. (2014). Gender matters: Building on the past, recognizing the present, and looking towards the future. In N. Lederman & S. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 187 203). Routledge.
Smith, J. L., Brown, E. R., Thoman, D. B., & Deemer, E. D. (2015). Losing its expected communal value: How stereotype threat undermines women’s identity as research scientists. Social Psychology of Education, 18(3), 443–466.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (applied social research methods) (p. 312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
