| Abstract |
It is often causally generalized that females naturally excel more at writing than males. Contrastingly, modern conventional wisdom similarly purports that males often innately excel more at science. True or not, both generalizations overlook important gender differences at the intersection of writing in science. This quantitative study investigates undergraduate life science majors’ attitudes to and perceptions of writing lab reports for 294 students who self-identify as either female or male. We used exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a three-factor scale and provide reliability and validity on several related constructs: confidence, sense of belonging, and persistence as a life science major. Our results indicate males self-report as being significantly more confident at writing lab reports (F (1, 292) = 186.08, p < 0.05) than females. With regard to writing lab reports, no significant differences were found between genders in the constructs of belongingness (F (1, 292) = 1.64, p = 0.20) and persistence as a life science major (F (1, 292) = 0.66, p = 0.42). Understanding attitudes and perceptions toward writing lab reports through an equity lens provides information to help science majors be successful. Our findings add to the literature on gender, equity, and science writing, motivating further exploration into underlying malleable cognitive mechanisms. |
, Mark A. Perkins 
