International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2021, Vol. 17(5) 170-191

Woman, Man, Society and Sex: How Pre-Service Teachers Perceive Basic Gender Concepts?

Aslı Gündoğan & Ahmet Taşdere

pp. 170 - 191   |  DOI:   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2007-14-0005.R1

Published online: September 30, 2021  |   Number of Views: 294  |  Number of Download: 442


The aim of the study is to reveal Turkish pre-service teachers' gender perceptions. For this, cognitive structures of pre-service teachers were analysed with minds maps created with the word association test (WAT) and their mental models were analysed by drawing. In this context, a holistic single case study was adopted depending on the purpose of the research and the data collection process. According to the findings obtained from the WAT, it was determined that the cognitive structures of pre-service teachers were built on the sex, society and woman, and the man was in a weakly related in the cognitive structure. On drawing analysis, it was seen that most of the pre-service teachers depicted man and woman with visuals reflecting traditional stereotypes. On the other hand, visuals reflecting an egalitarian and contemporary perspective. In the light of both analysis results, Turkish teacher education curricula were discussed and specific suggestions were presented.

Keywords: Gender Perceptions, Pre-Service Teachers, Teacher Training, Word Association Test, Drawing

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Gundogan, A. & Tasdere, A. (2021). Woman, Man, Society and Sex: How Pre-Service Teachers Perceive Basic Gender Concepts? . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(5), 170-191. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2021.375.12

Gundogan, A. and Tasdere, A. (2021). Woman, Man, Society and Sex: How Pre-Service Teachers Perceive Basic Gender Concepts? . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(5), pp. 170-191.

Chicago 16th edition
Gundogan, Asli and Ahmet Tasdere (2021). "Woman, Man, Society and Sex: How Pre-Service Teachers Perceive Basic Gender Concepts? ". International Journal of Progressive Education 17 (5):170-191. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2021.375.12.

  1. Almutawa, F. A.(2005). Beliefs of pre-service teachers at the University of Pittsburgh about gender roles and the role of teachers in relation to gender differences. PhD Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aratemur-Çimen, C.& Sezen, B. (2018). Değişen ders kitaplarında sekülerizm ve toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği araştırması [Research on Secularism and Gender Equality in Changing Textbooks]. Karşılaştırmalı Eğitim Derneği. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aslan, G. (2015). A metaphoric analysis regarding gender perceptions of preservice teachers. Education and Science, 40(181): 363-384. doi: 10.15390/EB.2015.2930. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Baba, H. (2007). Teacher candidates as the agents of change for a more gender equal society. Master Dissertation, Middle East Technical University. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bahar, M., Johnstone, A. H. and Sutcliffe, R.G. (1999). Investigation of students’ cognitive structure in elementary genetics through word association tests. Journal of Biological Education, 33, 134-141. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bayraktar, S. & Yağan-Güder, S. (2019). The relationship between pre-school prospective teachers' attitudes towards gender role and critical thinking disposition. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 9(2): 640-665. doi: 10.18039/ajesi.577713 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. and Demirel, F. (2015). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi [Pegem Academy) [Google Scholar]
  8. Çepni, S. (2014). Introduction to research and project studies. Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacılık. [Google Scholar]
  9. Çetin-Gündüz, H. &Tarhan, S.(2017). The impact of gender on primary school students’ attitudes towards choosing a profession. Elementary Education Online, 16(3): 1287-1300. doi: 10.17051/ilkonline.2017.330258. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  10. Dove, J. E. Everett, L. A. and  Preece, P. F. W. (1999). Exploring a hydrological concept through children’s drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 485-497. [Google Scholar]
  11. ERI (Education Reform Initiative). (2017). Eğitimdeveeğitimletoplumsalcinsiyeteşitliği[Gender Equality in Education and Training]. İstanbul: Eğitim Reformu Girişimi. Retrieved from content/uploads/2017/03/ERG_Egitimde-ve-Egitimle-Toplumsal-Cinsiyet-Esitligi-1.pdf [Google Scholar]
  12. EIGE (European Institute for Gender Equality) (2019). Gender equality index 2019. Work-life balance. Retrieved from doi: 10.2839/319154. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Elmore, J. (2000). The inclusion of gender equity issues pre-service teacher education as a predictor of self-reported, equitable teacher attitudes and practices. PhD Dissertation, Kansas State University. [Google Scholar]
  14. Esen, Y. (2013a). A study for developing gender sensitivity in pre-service teacher education. Education and Science, 38(169): 280-295. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  15. Esen, Y. (2013b). Making room for gender sensitivity in pre-service teacher education.European Researcher, 61(10-2): 2544-2554. doi: 10.13187/er.2013.61.2544. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  16. Frawley, T. (2005). Gender bias in the classroom: Current controversies and implications for teachers. Childhood Education,81(4):221-227. doi: 10.1080/00094056.2005.10522277.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Gillanders, C.& Vazquez, C. F.(2018). Towards theinclusion of a gender perspective in arts projects: A case study in secondary teacher training. Gender and Education, 32(6): 767-783. DOI: 10.1080/09540253.2018.1513455.  [Google Scholar]
  18. Gillham, B. (2000). Case study research methods. LONDON: Continuum [Google Scholar]
  19. Göker, Z. G. & Polatdemir, A.(2019). Türkiye’de yükseköğretim kurumlarında toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği mekanizmaları: Bir temel değerlendirme çalışması [Mechanisms for Gender Equality in Higher Education Institutions in Turkey: A Baseline Assessment Study]. Sabancı Üniversitesi Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Kadın Çalışmaları Mükemmeliyet Merkezi, İstanbul.  [Google Scholar]
  20. Gray, C.&Leith, H. (2004). Perpetuating gender stereotypes in the classroom: A teacher perspective.Educational Studies, 30 (1): 3-17. doi: 10.1080/0305569032000159705.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Gullberg, A.; Andersson, K.; Danielsson, A.; Scantlebury, K. & Hussenius, A. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ views of child: Reproducing of challenging gender stereotypes in science in preschool. ResSciEduc, 48: 691-715. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9593-z.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Hand, S.; Rice, L. & Greenlee, E. (2017). Exploring teachers’ and students’ gender role bias and students’ confidence in STEM fields. SocPsycholEduc, 20: 929-945. doi: 10.1007/s11218-017-9408-8  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Kessler, S.& McKenna, W. (1985). Gender: Anethnomethodological approach. The University of Chicago Press: London.  [Google Scholar]
  24. Kimmel, M. (2011). Thegendered society. Oxford University Press, London.  [Google Scholar]
  25. Koyuncu-Şahin, M., Esen-Çoban, A. & Korkmaz, A. (2018). Gender equality and its situation in the Turkish education system: from the perspectives of preschool teacher candidates. IBAD Journal of Social Sciences,3(2): 735-752. Doi: 10.21733/ibad.457232.  [Google Scholar]
  26. Lumadi, M. W. & Shongwe, S. S. (2010). The need for training gender-sensitive teachers: Addressing challenges of gender sensitive education for gender sensitive national development. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3 (3): 41-50. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mannathoko, C. (1999). Gender matters in the management of teacher education in Botswana. Social Analysis: The International Journal of Anthropology, 43(1): 103-118. [Google Scholar]
  28. McDowell, J.&Klattenberg, R. (2019). Does gender matter? A cross-national investigation of primary class-room discipline. Gender and Education, 31(8): 947-965, doi: 10.1080/09540253.2018.1458078 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. Mhlauli, M. (2011). Teaching for gender equality in primary schools in Botswana: reality or illusion? European Journal of Social Sciences, 24(1): 134-143. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  30. Miele, E. (2014). Using the Draw-a-Scientist Test for inquiry and evaluation. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(4), 36–40. [Google Scholar]
  31. Moses, I., Admiraal, W. F.& Berry, A. K. (2016). Gender and gender role differences in student-teachers’ commitment to teaching. SocPsycholEduc, 19: 475-492. doi: 10.1007/s11218-016-9340-3.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  32. Muntoni, F.&Retelsdorf, J. (2018). Gender-Specific teacher expectations in reading: The role of teachers’ gender stereotypes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54: 212-220. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.012.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Nakiboglu, C. (2008). Using word associations for assessing non major science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry instruction: the case of atomic structure. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 9(4), 309-322. [Google Scholar]
  34. Oakley, A. (1985). Sex, Gender and Society. England: Gower Publishing Company Limited. [Google Scholar]
  35. OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2015). The ABC of Gender Equality in Education: Aptitude, Behavior, Confidence. doi: 10.1787/9789264229945-en. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. Owens, S. L., Smothers, B. C. & Love, F. E. (2003). Are girls’ victims of gender bias in our nation’s schools? Journal of Instructional Psychology,30(2): 131-136. [Google Scholar]
  37. Özaydınlık, K. (2014). Women in Turkey on the basis of gender and education. Journal of Social Policy Studies,14-33: 93-112. doi: 10.21560/spcd.03093.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  38. Özen, F. (2018). Investigation of the experiences of classroom teacher candidates in the reconstruction of gender role: A case study in Turkey. Journal of Education and Training Studies,6(8): 29-43. doi: 10.11114/jets.v6i8.3211.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. Patton, M. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  40. Pridmore, P. and Bendelow, G. (1995). Images of health: exploring beliefs of children using the ‘draw-and-write’ technique. Health Education Journal 54: 473-488. [Google Scholar]
  41. Punch, K. F. (2005). Sosyalaraştırmalaragiriş: Nicelvenitelyaklaşımlar [Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches]. (Çev. D. Bayrak, HB Arslanve Z. Akyüz), Ankara, SiyasalKitabevi. [Google Scholar]
  42. Rennie, L. J. and Jarvis, T. (1995). Children’s choice of drawings to communicate their ideas about technology. Research in Science Education, 25, 239-252. [Google Scholar]
  43. Sadker, M. &Sadker, D. (1986). Sexism in the classroom: From grade school to graduate school. The Phi Delta Kappan, 67(7): 512-515. [Google Scholar]
  44. Saldıray, A. &Doğanay, A. (2017). Gender in hidden curriculum: A qualitative study of gender in the hidden curriculum of a primary school. Turkish Studies: International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 12(25): 671-704. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.12299.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  45. Sayman, D. (2007). The elimination of sexism and stereotyping in occupational education. The Journal of Men’s Studies,15(1): 19–30. doi: 10.3149/jms.1501.19.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  46. Seçgin, F. &Tural, A. (2011). Attitudes on gender roles of primary school teacher candidates. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(4): 2446-2458. download/imported/5000063166/5000059315.pdf?  [Google Scholar]
  47. Smith, F., Hardman, F. & Higgins, S. (2007). Gender inequality in the primary classroom: Will interactive whiteboards help? Gender and Education, 19 (4): 455-469. doi: 10.1080/09540250701442658.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  48. T.C. CumhurbaşkanlığıStratejiveBütçeBaşkanlığı(2019). On BirinciKalkınmaPlanı (2019-2023)” [Google Scholar]
  49. Tantekin-Erden, F. (2009). A course on gender equity in education: Does it affect gender role attitudes of pre-service teachers? Teaching and Teacher Education, 25: 409-414. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.11.001.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  50. Taşdere, A. & Özsevgeç T. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının pedagojik alan bilgisi bağlamında strateji-yöntem-teknik ve ölçme değerlendirme bilgilerinin incelenmesi. X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, Niğde.  [Google Scholar]
  51. TEDMEM (TürkEğitimDerneği) (2019). BirBakıştaEğitim 2019 (Education at a Glance 2019). Ankara: TürkEğitimDerneği.  [Google Scholar]
  52. Thomas, J. A., Pedersen, J. E., and Finson, K. (2001). Validating the Draw-A-Science-Teacher-Test-Checklist (DASTT-C): Exploring mental models and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12 (4), 295- 310. [Google Scholar]
  53. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (2016). Gender Review of the Global Education Monitoring Report 2016: Creating Sustainable Futures for All. Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  54. Ünal, F., Tarhan, S. &Çürükvelioğlu-Köksal, E. (2017). The role of gender, grade, department and socialization of gender norms in predicting perception of gender. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(1): 227-236. doi: 10.14686/buefad.287496.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  55. Walker, J.,, Pearce, C., Boe, K. & Lawson, M. (2019). The power of education to fight inequality: How increasing educational equality and quality is crucial to fighting economic and gender inequality. Oxfam Briefing Paper. doi: 10.21201/2019.4931.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  56. Wharton, A. S. (2005). The sociology of gender: An introduction to theory and research. Blackwell Publishing, Australia.  [Google Scholar]
  57. WEF (Word Economic Forum) (2020). Global Gender Gap Report 2020. World Economic Forum, Switzerland. [Google Scholar]
  58. WEF (World Economic Forum) (2018). The Global Gender Gap Report 2018. [Google Scholar]
  59. Yaşar, B. N. (2018). Teacher candidates' gender role attitudes: Case of Adiyaman University.” Woman 19(1): 101-113. [Google Scholar]
  60. Younger, M.& Warrington, M. (2008). The gender agenda in primary teacher education in England: Fifteen lost years? Journal of Education Policy, 23(4): 429–445. doi: 10.1080/02680930802054396.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  61. YÖK (Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu) (2018). Sınıf öğretmenliği lisans programı. [Google Scholar]
  62. Zelyurt, H. (2018). The impact of family on the gender development of the child. Turkish Studies, 13(19): 2001-2017. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.13819.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref]