Building gender inclusivity: disentangling the influence of classroom demography on classroom participation

Who Speaks and Who Listens: Revisiting the Chilly Climate in College Classrooms

“…Because active participation in college classrooms contributes to increased student learning and development, a large body of work in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning points to ways in which instructors can encourage student participation (e.g., Auster and MacRone 1994; Fassinger 1996; Gillis 2019). Through participating in discussion, students learn to communicate effectively by organizing their ideas, advocating for their points of view, and growing as leaders (e.g., Ming 2010; Opie et al 2019). While it is important to increase participation rates overall, it is also important to examine participation rates of varying social groups—in other words, to view college classrooms as social sites and pay attention to who speaks and who listens.…”

“…For example, Boersma et al (1981) find no gender differences either in their observational data of classrooms or their survey of students’ perceptions of their professors’ behaviors. Likewise, studies by Drew and Work (1998) and Brady and Eisler (1999, 138) find no statistically significant differences in men and women students’ classroom participation patterns, arguing that “there are clearly more variables involved in classroom interaction patterns than faculty and student sex.” Based on 411 students’ participation grades in 12 sections of a business course, Opie et al (2019) conclude that although men’s participation grades are not higher overall, men have higher participation grades in classes with higher proportions of men (Opie et al 2019). Reflecting this conclusion, researchers have argued that other contextual factors, such as class size (Constantinople, Cornelius, and Gray 1988; Crawford and MacLeod 1990; Opie et al 2019), gender ratio of students in the classroom (Canada and Pringle 1995; Constantinople, Cornelius, and Gray 1988), and student GPAs (Crawford and MacLeod 1990), are more important than students’ gender in determining classroom participation patterns.…”

“…Tannen (1991) also argues that classroom participation is more congenial to men’s language patterns than to women’s, because men are comfortable speaking in large public spaces whereas women are more comfortable speaking in private to a small group of people. Because college classrooms are embedded in a context where “men’s voices frequently command greater power and influence than women’s voices” (Opie et al 2019, 38) and men are generally believed to be more competent than women in current society, men students end up with higher status, more opportunities to participate, and more positive evaluations in classrooms compared with women students. Scholars of gender and communication also point out that the same types of interactional behavior may not have the same meaning depending on the speaker and participant gender.…”

Building inclusive PA classrooms: The Diversity Inclusion Model

“…Establishing classroom environments where all students feel their opinions are valued and respected by the instructor and their classmates is important (Bondy et al, 2015), especially considering that female students are often less likely to vocally participate in classroom discussions compared to their male counterparts (Rocca, 2010; Steele et al, 2008). This pattern of more vocal participation by male students is amplified with male professors (Opie et al, 2019; Rocca, 2010). Most research on gender differences in vocal participation in the academic settings has focused mainly on business (Opie et al, 2019) and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects (Hinsley et al, 2017; Steele et al, 2008).…”

“…This pattern of more vocal participation by male students is amplified with male professors (Opie et al, 2019; Rocca, 2010). Most research on gender differences in vocal participation in the academic settings has focused mainly on business (Opie et al, 2019) and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects (Hinsley et al, 2017; Steele et al, 2008). However, it remains an important area of focus for public administration education, particularly given that disparity between the previously discussed number of women students (79%) (Okahana and Zhou, 2017: 10) versus the number of women faculty (34%) (Primo, 2013) and the long-term implications for women’s participation and advancement in the field (Charles and Brunn, 2011).…”