![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Resumen
Se aplica el test de dibujar un científico a una muestra de 443 estudiantes de secundaria como medio de elicitar su imagen. Los dibujos se analizan mediante una dimensión personal y una dimensión situational, divididas, a su vez, en otras categorías, cada una conteniendo una serie de elementos, cuyo análisis permite esbozar la imagen de los científicos. Los resultados muestran evidencias de una cierta imagen estereotipada de los científicos, especialmente en la dimensión situacional (caracterizada por el laboratorio y los objetos de laboratorio), aunque los rasgos prototípicos referidos a las características personales del científico son menos intensos de lo que sugieren otras investigaciones; la bata blanca, el laboratorio y el material del laboratorio serían los rasgos centrales del estereotipo del científico. La imagen mayoritaria de la ciencia que sugieren los dibujos es una especie de química aplicada realizada en el laboratorio. Finalmente, aunque chicos y chicas tienen aproximadamentela misma imagen global de los científicos existen pequenas diferencias quepueden ser signo de progresosy diferencias más profundas.
Abstract
The Draw-a-Scientist test is applied to secondary school students as a means of eliciting students' image of scientists. The drawings are analysed along two dimensions—personal and situational—subdivided into various categories, each containing specific elements. Results show evidence that students' stereotypic image of scientists arises primarily from situational features (characterized by the laboratory and laboratory instruments). Scientists' personal charateristics display less stereotypic strength than is suggested in the literature. In this context, scientists are stereotyped by their white laboratory coat, the laboratory and laboratory instruments. The predominant image of science inferred from students' drawings is a kind of applied chemistry carried out in the laboratory. Finally, although girls and boys image of scientists is very similar, there are certain differences that could represent important underlying differences.
Extended Summary
The image students have of science and scientists is important for science education as it is closely linked to the way science is taught and learned in schools. Greater knowledge of students' notion of science is helpful for improving science teaching and learning. Previous research has suggested that students' stereotypic image of scientists include: being predominantly male, wearing glasses, having a beard, and being bald. However, above all it is dominated by the classic image of the “crazy scientist”. It is thus generally considered that scientists spend their time in a laboratory, surrounded by substances, live beings and technological artifacts. Moreover, gender is a worldwide variable in science education, given the persistent differences between girls' and boys' image of science. Students' image of science and scientists has been frequently studied using paper and pencil tests, but also through their drawings. Draw-a-Scientist (DAST) is a projective test which involves drawing a picture of a scientific person, and was administered in the present study to elicit students' image of scientists. The paper reports the results of administering the DAST to a sample of 443 13-year old secondary school students, balanced by gender, from eight different schools.
The drawings were analysed by classifying items along two dimensions, personal and situational. The personal dimension refers to all the details drawn on the scientist, such as: gender, general appearance, face, hair, eyes, clothes, and manipulative procedures. The situational dimension includes all items external to a person that are surrounding the scientist in the picture, such as: overall context, number and type of furniture, substances, live beings, and number and type of apparatus.
Results show that the feature of madness or craziness represented by the “crazy scientist” stereotype is not at all frequent. Other traits such as baldness, glasses, and having a beard are no longer considered stereotyped characteristics of scientists. With respect to gender, male scientist still appear more often than female, but only in a two to one proportion. The most important features of scientists are their location inside the laboratory, wearing a white overcoat, and in the presence of laboratory instruments, (mainly glass apparatus, such as test tubes and flasks at times linked in complex ways).
The image of science that emerges from students' drawings might be labelled as a kind of applied chemistry carried out in the laboratory. Scientists are represented manipulating substances and artifacts, inventing chemicals, observing things, sometimes through telescopes and microscopes, thinking and talking. This empirical image of science is incomplete and distorted, as it ignores or depreciates the value of theoretical reflection in science. Moreover, the fact that practically all students drew a lone scientist could be a sign of the “ivory tower” myth, that understand scientific research as an individual endeavour, ignoring the collective nature of science, and the pervasive influence of technological, social, political and ideological contexts.
Although girls' and boys' overall image of scientists are found to be similar, particular characteristics emerge that could be a sign of more important underlying differences. The scientist's gender depicted in the drawings is particularly influenced by the subject's gender: boys drew male scientists almost exclusively, while girls appeared divided in half, drawing the same number of male and female scientists. Quantitative results show that girls included more apparatus and furniture than boys, while the latter drew more substances and live beings than girls. Qualitative differences show that girls included more buttons, books, and stars, depicting scientists in more passive activities, while boys drew more engines and destilation sets, and placed scientists in more dynamic activities. Girls' and boys' attitudes to science—inferred from these results—does not support the hypothesis, frequently reported in other studies, that girls' are less interested in science.
Summing up, results on the DAST does not support some charateristics of students' image of scientists reported in previous studies, such as the crazy scientist stereotype or the almost exclusive male representation. It however reinforces others, such as wearing a white overcoat, working in a laboratory, and manipulating artifacts, tubes, liquids, and fumes. Although inferences about scientific epistemology are hard to extrapolate from drawings, some salient features are put forth.