Who and what gets recognized in peer recognition

Abstract

Previous work has identified that recognition from others is an important predictor of students' participation, persistence, and career intentions in physics. However, research has also found a gender bias in peer recognition in which student nominations of strong peers in their physics course disproportionately favor men over women. In this study, we draw on methods from social network analysis and find a consistent gender bias in which men disproportionately under-nominate women as strong in their physics course in two offerings of both a lecture course (for science and engineering, but not physics, majors) and a distinct lab course (for science, engineering, and physics majors). We also find in one offering of the lecture course that women disproportionately under-nominate men, contrary to what previous research would predict. We expand on prior work by also probing two data sources related to who and what gets recognized in peer recognition: students' interactions with their peers (who gets recognized) and students' written explanations of their nominations of strong peers (what gets recognized). Results suggest that the nature of the observed gender bias in peer recognition varies between the instructional contexts of lecture and lab. In the lecture course, the gender bias is related to who gets recognized: both men and women disproportionately over-nominate their interaction ties to students of their same gender as strong in the course. In the lab course, the gender bias is also related to what gets recognized: men nominate men more than women because of skills related to interactions, such as being helpful. These findings illuminate the different ways in which students form perceptions of their peers and add nuance to our understanding of the nature of gender bias in peer recognition.

arXiv commentSubmitted to Physical Review Physics Education Research

References in corpus (10)

• Teaching Critical Thinking
• Hermione and the Secretary: How gendered task division in introductory physics labs can disrupt equitable learning
• On the Question of Effective Sample Size in Network Modeling: An Asymptotic Inquiry
• Educational commitment and social networking: The power of informal networks
• Becoming a Physicist: The Roles of Research, Mindsets, and Milestones in upper-division student perceptions
• Network positions in active learning environments in physics
• Practitioner's guide to social network analysis: Examining physics anxiety in an active-learning setting
• The impact of perceived recognition by physics instructors on women's self-efficacy and interest
• Understanding interaction network formation across instructional contexts in remote physics courses
• Introductory physics students' recognition of strong peers: Gender and racial/ethnic bias differ by course level and context

Cited by in corpus (3)

• Person-centered and qualitative approaches to network analysis in physics education research
• Bias in physics peer recognition does not explain gaps in perceived recognition
• Investigating peer recognition across an introductory physics sequence: Do first impressions last?