An awareness of epistemological assumptions: the case of gender studies

Perceptions of differences in the participation and achievement of girls and boys in school science and mathematics have given rise to considerable curriculum research and professional development. This research, and the practices arising from it, has aimed at increasing the participation of girls in ‘non‐traditional’ school subjects, with the ultimate goal of enhancing girls’ post‐school options. Mathematics and science have been seen as critical in this respect, particularly the higher levels of mathematics and the physical sciences.

This research and professional development have contributed to our understanding of the issues and have no doubt affected the post‐school options of some girls. However, there is also dissatisfaction at the lack of significant change that has flowed from this work. A more critical analysis is now emerging, leading to a deeper questioning of the assumptions that underlie research and development in the field. Ironically, at the same time there are reports that funding for research into aspects of gender issues is now taking an even lower profile than in recent years (Tisdall 1992).

This paper has emerged from debates relating to gender issues from the perspective of two teachers, one of science and the other of mathematics. The debates were precipitated by a move from work as school teachers to work in higher education, where there is an explicitly stated responsibility for research as well as teaching. The change in our labour served to highlight personal questions about the legitimation of different accounts of education in research, science and mathematics education and gender issues. It was in the process of grappling with the apparent plethora of research methods that we began to look at the epistemological assumptions of research into gender issues in science and mathematics education.

For us then, there are three major interrelated and overlapping areas of concern. One is related to the epistemological assumptions that pervade science and mathematics in schools. The second also concerns epistemological assumptions, those relating to educational research, particularly into gender issues. The third raises the ontological question of the conceptualization of gender within the research. We needed a conceptual framework to enable us to critique the normalization of the debates and uncover the problematics within each of these three concerns. At the same time, the framework had to allow an examination of the interrelatedness and continuities between them. It was the normalization and apparent consensus surrounding these issues that was disturbing for us. This we recognized as a depoliticization of social institutions which are essentially political. It was against this background, and in acknowledgement of some feminist critiques (Fraser 1989), that we use a framework developed by Habermas (1972), which recognizes the political dynamic of epistemological positions, and allows us to make explicit the politics of educational research.

Our starting point, in this paper, is Habermas's work. We outline the three ‘knowledge‐constitutive’ interests of this schema, and describe their implications for education. We then explore the dominant perspective within science and mathematics education. Having described this context, we examine the gender research with particular attention to the conceptualization of gender. With reference to Habermas's framework the epistemological and ontological assumptions of this research are explored, and the possibilities and limitations are discussed. This is used to examine the epistemological basis of different research methodologies.

We contend that there is a relationship between the scientific paradigm, the organization of education and the framing of research. Further this relationship has constituted the field of research about gender and science and mathematics and limited its potential for explanation.