Teaching Style Differences between Male and Female Science Teachers in Qatari Schools: Possible Impact on Student Achievement
More details
Hide details
Qatar University, QATAR
College of the North Atlantic, QATAR
Abu Dhabi University, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Online publication date: 2019-09-15
Publication date: 2019-09-15
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2019;15(12):em1800
In Qatar’s gender-segregated public schools, female students outperform male students in international science tests such as PISA and TIMMS. In contrast to the international trend for top performing countries, however, female students report lower levels of interest in science-based careers than males. One possible factor that may contribute to this discrepancy is the difference in teaching styles between female teachers and their male counterparts. In this paper we focus on results obtained from 105 classroom observations (39 males and 66 females) selected from 50 different public schools as part of two independent research projects to study the motivation factors and attitudes toward and interest in science among Qatari students. In addition, 40 semi-structured interviews of students, teachers and administrators were conducted. The observations were guided using an adopted Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) evaluation rubric consisting of 13 teaching traits which provides a standardized mean for detecting the degree to which science classroom instruction is reformed through a focus on Lesson Design, Content, Pedagogic Knowledge and classroom culture. Female teachers provided better delivery during theory classes, whereas male teachers demonstrated better performance in laboratory-based classes.
Abd El Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., ... Tuan, H. L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Effective Learning and Teaching; Teaching Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Retrieved from
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1998). Blueprints for Reform: Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Basow, S. A. (1999). Student evaluations of college professors: When gender matters. Journal of Educational Psychology 87(4), 656-65.
Boohan, R. (2016). The Language of Mathematics in Science: A Guide for Teachers of 11-16 Science. The Association for Science Education, Nuffield Foundation. Retrieved from
Bottia, M. C., Stearns, E., Mickelson, R. A., Moller, S., & Valentinoc, L. (2015). Growing the Roots of STEM Majors: Female Math and Science High School Faculty and the Participation of Students in STEM. Working paper series No. 103.
BouJaoude, S., & Gholam, G. (2013). Gender and science in the Arab states: current status and future prospects. In N. Mansour & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science Education and Diversity (pp. 339-358). New York, NY: Springer.
Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008) Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature. J. Research in Science Teaching, (45), 971-1082.
Carrington, B., Tymms, P., & Merrell, C. (2008). Role models, school improvement and the ‘gender gap’—do menbring out the best in boys and women the best in girls? British Educational Research Journal, 34(3), 315-327.
Centra, J. A., & Gaubatz, N. B. (1998). Is there gender bias in student ratings of instruction? Journal of Higher Education, 70, 17-33.
Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2013) Teaching thematic analysis: Overcoming challenges and developing strategies for effective learning. The Psychologist, 26(2), 120-123.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (2007). Young people’s images of science. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Feldman, K. A. (1992). College students’ view of male and female college teachers: Part I—Evidence from the social laboratory and experiments. Research in Higher Education, 33, 317-75.
Francis, B., Skelton, C., Carrington, B., Hutchings, M., Read B., & Hall I. (2006). A Perfect Match? Pupils’ and teachers’ views of the impact of matching educators and learners by gender. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Warwick, 6-9 September 2006.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction, White Plains. NY: Longman, 1996.
Galloway, K. R., & Bretz, S. L. (2015). Measuring Meaningful Learning in the Undergraduate General Chemistry and Organic Chemistry Laboratories: A Longitudinal Study. J. Chem. Educ., 92(12), 2019–2030.
Gardner, P. L. (1975). Attitudes to science. Studies in Science Education, 2, 1–41.
Gilmartin, S., Denson, N., Li, E., Bryant, A., & Aschbacher P. (2007). Gender ratios in high school science departments: The effect of percent female faculty on multiple dimensions of students’ science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 980–1009.
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Griffith, A. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 911-922.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88, 28-54.
Ibe, J. O., Adah, S. A., & Ihejiamaizu, C. C. (2013). Assessment of Secondary School Chemistry Teachers’ Quality through Identification and Use of Laboratory Apparatus in Cross. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(5).
Islahi, F., & Nasreen (2013) Who Make Effective Teachers, Men or Women? An Indian Perspective. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1(4), 285-293.
Koballa, T. R. (1995). Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice. In S. M. Glynn & R. Duit (Eds.), Children’s attitudes toward learning science (pp. 59–84).
Lacey, C. H., Saleh, A., & Gorman, R. (1998). Teaching nine to five: A study of the teaching styles of male and female professors. Paper presented at the Annual Women in Educational Leadership Annual Conference. Nebraska October 11-12.
Lim, J., & Meer, J. (2017). The Impact of Teacher-Student Gender Matches, Random Assignment Evidence from South Korea. Journal of Human Resources, 52(4), 979-997.
Martin, A., & Marsh, H. (2005). Motivating boys and motivating girls: Does teacher gender really make a difference? Australian Journal of Education, 49(3), 320-334.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 International results in science. Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website:
McCormick, R., & Murphy, P. (1998). The Use of Mathematics in Science and Technology Education, Perspectives and Issues. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, The Queen’s University of Belfast, Northern Ireland, 27th - 30th August 1998. Retrieved from
Millar, R., & Abraham, I. (2009). Practical Work: making it more effective. Science School Research, 91(334), 59-64.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Loveless, T. (2016). 20 Years of TIMSS: International Trends in Mathematics and Science Achievement, Curriculum, and Instruction. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. Retrieved from
Novak, J. D. (2011). A Theory of education: meaningful learning underlies the constructive integration of thinking, feeling, and acting leading to empowerment and responsibility. Meaningful learning Review, 1, 1-14.
OECD. (2016a). PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic and Financial Literacy, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from
OECD. (2016b). PISA 2015 Results in focus. Retrieved from
OECD. (2018a). Education GPS. Retrieved from
OECD. (2018b). Country profile, Qatar. Retrieved from
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitude towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079.
Piburn, M., Sawada, D., Falconar, K. Truly, J. Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2000). Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). Technical Report No. IN00-1 Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers (ACEPT) Retrieved from
Russell, C., & Weaver, G. (2008). Student Perceptions of the Purpose and Function of the Laboratory in Science: A Grounded Theory Study. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2).
Said, Z. (2016). Science Education Reform in Qatar: Progress and Challenges. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(8), 2253-2265.
Said, Z. (July 2014) The Importance of Practical Activities in School Science: Perspectives of Independent School Teachers in Qatari Schools. The 5th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies EDULEARN13, Barcelona, Spain. Proceedings, 4847-4856.
Said, Z., & Al-Amadi, A. (2018a). The Role of Family Engagement in Students’ Scıence Learnıng In Qatarı Schools. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational & Social Sciences (EPESS), 11, 142-152.
Said, Z., Adam, E., & Abu-Hannieh, A. (2018b). Enhancement of School Students’ Interest in, and Attitude toward Science by Training Their Teachers on Effective Delivery of Practical Activities. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational & Social Sciences (EPESS), 9, 52-58.
Said, Z., Al-Emadi, A. A., Friesen, H. L., & Adam, E. (2018). Assessing the Science Interest, Attitude, and Self-Efficacy of Qatari Students at the Preparatory, Secondary, and University Levels. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 14(12), em1618.
Said, Z., Anwari, M., Al-Shahrouri, H., & Adam, E. (2018c). Impact of Long Training Course for Science Teachers on Their Delivery Skills of Practical Science. Proceedings of International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI2018, 12th-14th November 2018, Seville, Spain. The International Academy of Technology, Education and Development (IATED), 8168-8174.
Said, Z., Summers, R., Abd-el-Khalick, F., & Wang, S. (2016b). Attitudes toward science among grades 3 through 12 Arab students in Qatar: findings from a cross-sectional national study. International Journal of Science Education, 38(4), 621-643.
Schibeci, R. A. (1984). Attitudes to science: An update. Studies in Science Education, 11, 26–59.
Sellami, A., Kimmel, L., Wittrock, J., Hunscher, B., Cotter, A., Al-Emadi, A., & Al-Emadi, D. (2017). Factors shaping Qatari students’ career expectations in STEM, business, or public sectors fields. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 13(10), 6491-6505.
Shumow, L., & Schmidt, J. A. (2014). Enhancing Adolescents’ Motivation for Science SAGE publications, Thousand Oaks, California (p. 127).
Strati, A. D., & Schmidt, J. A. (2013). Exploring the role of teacher challenge and support in high school general science classrooms. The annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April, 2012.
Sullivan, G. M., & Feinn, R. (2012). Using Effect Size-or Why the p value is Not Enough. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 4(3), 279-282.
Tashakkori A., & Teddle, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wentzel, K. R., Battle, A., Russel, S. L., & Loony, L.B. (2010). Social supports from teachers and peers as predictors of academic and social motivating. Contemporary Psychology, 35(3), 193-202.
Wood, T. D. (2012). Teacher Perceptions of Gender-Based Differences among Elementary School Teachers. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(2), 317-345.
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top