Paper detail

Exploring the contributions of self-efficacy and test anxiety to gender differences in assessments

The observed performance difference between women and men on assessments in physics---the "gender gap"---is a significant and persistent inequity which has broad implications for the participation of women in physics. Research also shows that gender-based inequities extend to affective measures, such as self-efficacy. In this exploratory study, we report on gender disparities in self-efficacy and test anxiety and their relationship to assessment scores in our active-learning introductory physics course. Overall, gender-based differences in favour of men are observed in all our measures, with women having lower scores on measures associated with success (self-efficacy and assessment scores) and a higher score on a possibly detrimental affective factor (test anxiety). Using a multiple regression model-selection process to explore which measures may explain end-of-course Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and final exam scores, we find that the best fitting models include FCI pretest and self-efficacy as predictors, but do not include test anxiety.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.