Study on the Meaning of Gender in Mathematics Education Research

수학 교육 연구에서 성별(性別)의 의미 고찰

  • Received : 2019.09.10
  • Accepted : 2019.11.14
  • Published : 2019.11.30


Gender might be interpreted in different roles and meanings depending on social and cultural backgrounds. Based on the premise that understanding of gender may change the direction of mathematics education, this paper confirmed how gender is interpreted in the preceding study of mathematics education in Korea by applying the literature research method. In particular, predictive model based on empirical perspective and gender schema model based on constructivist perspective. Based on the analysis of gender and research methods in cultural and historical composition models based on historical perspectives and postmodernism models based on postmodernism perspectives, this study analyzed trends in domestic mathematics education. As a result of the analysis, it is confirmed that gender is recognized as a biological difference in domestic mathematics education, and that analysis of gender and related elements of mathematics education is mainly used using statistical analysis techniques. This suggests that various approaches to interpreting gender's role in future mathematics education are needed. The existing mathematics education research on gender is composed in terms of gender differences. Since biology at the time did not explain this difference, however, it should now be based on the concept of gender, which is socially defined gender. Accurate understanding of gender and gender can be the basis for clearer understanding and interpretation of gender-related mathematics research.


  1. Kang. H. J, (2008). Development strategies on the trend of students avoiding science and engineering, Suck-Myung Women's University. Master Thesis.
  2. Kwon. S. A. (2018). Exploring Differential Item Functioning of TIMSS 2015 Mathematics Items by Gender, Based on the Cognitive Diagnosis Models, Educational Research Institute, 40(1), 61-82.
  3. Kwon, O. N., Im, H., Park, K. M., & Huh, R, G. (1997). The Gender Difference in Mathematics Achivement by the Difficulty level of the Test, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 7(1), 199-209
  4. Kwon, Om N., & Ju, M, K. (2005). Feminist Perspectives on the Development of a Gender-Neutral Mathematics Program, Journal of the Korean school mathematics society, 8(1), 55-75.
  5. Kim, Y, M. (2017). Spatial Ability, Its Relationship to Mathematics Achievement,and Strategic Choices for Spatial Tasks Among Engineering Freshmen,and Gender Differences, Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 28(3), 149-171.
  6. Song, J. Y. (2018). The Role of Gender in Mathematics Career Choice, Classroom Engagement, and Achievement: Mathematics Self-efficacy, Task Value, and Task Cost as Mediators, The Journal of Career Education Research, 31(2), 1-25.
  7. Lee, S, H., & An, S. H. (2016). The influences of mathematics self-efficacy, mathematics anxiety and mathematics attitude on mathematics-related career choice : Focused on gender difference, Korean Journal of Youth Studies, 23(6), 1-26.
  8. Lee, S. Y. (2009). Correlation between the mathematical problem-solving and language skills in context - Compared according to gender. Educational Research, 17, 155-183.
  9. Lee, E. J., & Lee, K, H. (2001). A Study on the Factors Influencing Gender Differences Changes of Korean students in PISA Mathematics Assessment, The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 21(4), 313-326.
  10. Lee, S, B., & Kim, S. W. (2017). Detecting Differential Item Functioning based on Gender: Field of Mathematics in the TIMSS 2007, Journal Of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education, 29(3), 757-766.
  11. Lee, H. S., & Ko, H, K. (2014). Gender Differences in Geometry of the TIMSS 8th Grade Mathematics Based on a Cognitive Diagnostic Modeling Approach, School Mathematics, 16(2), 387-407.
  12. Han, H. S., & Choi, K. H. (2012). A Study on the Mathematics Teachers' Gender Difference in Teachers' Perceptions of the Affective Domain in Teaching Practice, Communications of Mathematical Education, 26(4), 363-381.
  13. Buder, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Roudedge.
  14. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.
  15. Cohen, P. C. (1983). A calculating people: The spread of numeracy in early America. Chicago: University of Chicago: Press.
  16. Collins, P. H. (1999). Moving beyond gender: Intersectionality and scientific knowledge. In M. M. Ferree, J. Lorber, and B. B. Hess (Eds.), Revisioning gender (pp. 261-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  17. Crawford, M. (2003). Gender and humor in social context. Journal of pragmatics, 35(9), 1413-1430.
  18. Damarin, S., & Erchick, D. B. (2010). Toward clarifying the meanings of "gender" in mathematics education research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 310-323.
  19. Esmonde, I. (2011). SNIPS AND SNAILS AND PUPPY DOGS'TAILS: GENDERISM AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION. For the Learning of Mathematics, 31(2), 27-31.
  20. Fennema, E., & Hart, L. E. (1994). Gender and the JRME. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education.
  21. Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1977). Sex-related differences in mathematics achievement, spatial visualization, and affective factors. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 51-71.
  22. Geis, F. L. (1993). Self-fulfilling prophecies: A social psychological view of gender. In A. E. Beali & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (pp. 9-54). New York: Guilford Press.
  23. Glasser, H. M., & Smith III, J. P. (2008). On the vague meaning of "gender" in education research: The problem, its sources, and recommendations for practice. Educational researcher, 37(6), 343-350.
  24. Greenberg, J. A. (1999). Defining male and female: Intersexuality and the collision between law and biology. Arizona Law Review, 41, 265-328.
  25. Halpern, D. F., Wai, J., & Saw, A. (2005). A psychobiosocial model: Why females are sometimes greater than and sometimes less than males in math achievement. In A. M. Gallagher & J. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics: An integrative psychological approach (pp. 48-72). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University.
  26. Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, A. B., & Williams, C. C. (2008). Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science, 321(5888), 494-495.
  27. Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2006). Gender similarities in mathematics and science. Science, 314(5799), 599-600.
  28. Light, J. (1999). When computers were women. Technology and Culture, 40, 455-483.
  29. Linn, M. C., & Hyde, J. S. (1989). Gender, mathematics, and science. Educational researcher, 18(8), 17-27.
  30. Lubienski, S. T., & Bowen, A. (2000). Who's counting? A survey of mathematics education research 1982-1998. Journal for research in mathematics education, 626-633.
  31. Pinker, S. (2005). The science of gender and science: Pinker vs. Spelke, A Debate. Mind Brain and Behavior Initiative (MBB), Harvard University. Retrieved June 21, 2017, html.
  32. Ruskai, M. B. (1995). A mathematician's perspective. In B. Grevholm & G. Hanna (Eds.) Gender and mathematics education (pp. 386-389). Lund, Sweden: Lund University Press.
  33. Ruskai, M. B. (1996). Are 'feminist perspectives' in mathematics and science feminist? In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt, & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 437-444). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  34. Sperling, S. (1997). Baboons with briefcases vs. langurs with lipstick: Feminism and functionalism in primate studies. In R. N. Lancaster & M. di Leonardo (Eds.), The gender/sexuality reader: Culture, history, political economy (pp. 249-264). New York: Routledge.
  35. Valian, V (1999). Why so slow: The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  36. World Health Organization. (2008). What do we mean by "sex" and "gender"? Retrieved August 31, 2019, from