Gender differences and misconceptions in operating with percentages: evidence from INVALSI tests

Journal title CADMO
Author/s Chiara Giberti
Publishing Year 2019 Issue 2018/2
Language Italian Pages 18 P. 97-114 File size 416 KB
DOI 10.3280/CAD2018-002007
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

International standardized assessments highlight the existence of gender differences in mathematics performances: male outperform female in many countries and in Italy this gap is remarkable. The results of Italian standardized assessment, called INVALSI test, confirm the existence and the importance of this gap. In this paper we examine three INVALSI items for Grade 10, similar in terms of mathematical content, item type and question intent. The quantitative analysis of each item, based on the Rasch Model, shows that male and female answers have distinctly different response behaviors, and these differences are similar in the three items. A pedagogical interpretation of the quantitative results led us to explain this gap in terms of a different influence of a specific misconception on males and females.

Keywords: Gender gap; misconceptions; percentages; Rasch analysis; standardized assessment.

  1. Maffia, A., Giberti, C. (2016), “Didattica della matematica e PISA: strade percorse e nuovi sentieri da battere”, in L. Palmerio (a cura di), PISA 2012. Contributi di approfondimento. Milano: FrancoAngeli, pp. 190-200.
  2. Maffia, A., Mariotti, M.A. (2018), “Intuitive and Formal Models of Whole Numbers Multiplication: Relations and Emerging Structures”, For the Learning of Mathematics, 38 (3), pp. 30-36.
  3. Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Foy, P., Hooper, M. (2016), TIMSS 2015 International Results in Mathematics. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
  4. OECD (2013), PISA 2012 Results: Excellence Through Equity: Giving Every Student the Chance to Succeed (Volume II). Paris: OECD Publishing.
  5. OECD (2016), PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  6. Ongaki, N.M., Musa, F.W. (2014), “Enhancing Socio-Economic Equity in Accessing Quality Education: A Case of Form One Selection Policy in KISII County, Kenya”, The International Journal of Business & Management, 2 (11), p. 157.
  7. Pajares, F. (2005), “Gender Differences in Mathematics Self-efficacy Beliefs”, in A. Gallagher, J. Kaufman (eds), Gender Differences in Mathematics: An Integrative Psychological Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 294-315.
  8. Pizmony-Levy, O., Torney-Purta, J. (2018), “How Journalists and Researchers Communicate Results of International Large-Scale Assessments”, Cadmo. Giornale Italiano di Pedagogia sperimentale. An International Journal of Educational Research, 26, 1, pp. 51-65.
  9. Rasch, G. (1960), Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
  10. Riegle-Crumb, C. (2005), “The Cross-national Context of the Gender Gap in Math and Science”, in L. Hedges, B. Schneider (eds), The Social Organization of Schooling. New York: Russell, pp. 227-243.
  11. Ryan, J., Williams, J. (2007), Children’S Mathematics 4-15: Learning from Errors and Misconceptions: Learning from Errors and Misconceptions. Maidenhead (UK): McGraw-Hill Education.
  12. Sbaragli, S. (2012), “Il ruolo delle misconcezioni nella didattica della matematica”, in G. Bolondi, M.I. Fandiño Pinilla (a cura di), I quaderni della didattica. Metodi e strumenti per l’insegnamento e l’apprendimento della matematica. Napoli: EDISES, pp. 121-139.
  13. Sfard, A. (2005), “What could be more Practical than Good Research?”, Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58 (3), pp. 393-413.
  14. Winkelmann, H., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Robitzsch, A. (2008), “Gender Differences in the Mathematics Achievements of German Primary School Students: Results from a German Large-scale Study”, ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40 (4), pp. 601-616.
  15. Wößmann, L., Schütz, G. (2006), “Efficiency and Equity in European Education and Training Systems”, Analytical Report for the European Commission prepared by the European Expert Network on Economics of Education. Bruxelles: European Commission.

  • The Properties of Powers: Didactic Contract and Gender Gap Federica Ferretti, Chiara Giberti, in International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education /2021 pp.1717
    DOI: 10.1007/s10763-020-10130-5
  • Changing the Order of Factors Does Not Change the Product but Does Affect Students’ Answers, Especially Girls’ Answers Clelia Cascella, Chiara Giberti, Giorgio Bolondi, in Education Sciences /2021 pp.201
    DOI: 10.3390/educsci11050201
  • The role of metaphors in interpreting students’ difficulties in operating with percentages: A mixed method study based on large scale assessment Chiara Giberti, George Santi, Camilla Spagnolo, in European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education /2023 pp.297
    DOI: 10.30935/scimath/12642

Chiara Giberti, Differenze di genere e misconcezioni nell’operare con le percentuali: evidenze dalle prove INVALSI in "CADMO" 2/2018, pp 97-114, DOI: 10.3280/CAD2018-002007