THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GENDER AND UNDERGRADUATE PHYSICS STUDENTS’ LABORATORY PERFORMANCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26418/jpmipa.v17i1.101802Keywords:
Gender, Introductory Physics, Laboratory Performance, Undergraduate StudentsAbstract
Laboratory activities play a central role in fundamental physics courses because they support the development of procedural skills, experimental reasoning, and practical problem solving. This study investigates whether gender and class group are associated with the laboratory performance of undergraduate physics students. The participants were 54 first-year physics students enrolled in a fundamental physics laboratory course. Laboratory performance was measured through structured observation rubrics focusing on procedural accuracy and practical engagement, as well as an individual performance test assessing experimental readiness and data interpretation skills. Descriptive analysis showed that the mean score for performance observation was 88.44, while the mean score for performance test was 67.04. Both variables were non-normally distributed (Shapiro-Wilk = 0.92, p < 0.001) but showed homogeneous variances across gender and class group. Spearman analysis revealed a moderate positive association between observation and test scores ( = 0.399, p = 0.0028), suggesting that students who performed well during laboratory activities tended to achieve higher scores on individual performance test. Wilcoxon test showed that gender was linked to differences in observation scores (W = 480, p = 0.03748) but not on test scores (W = 368.5, p = 0.8892), whereas class group showed the opposite pattern. Overall, the findings highlights the importance of using multiple assessment approaches to capture laboratory performance more comprehensively and to avoid overinterpreting gender differences as deficits. The results contribute context-specific evidence form Indonesian physics education and support efforts to promote more equitable laboratory learning environments.References
J. N. Onukwu and U. D. Ikenna, “Interplay of Group and Individualized Laboratory Activities in Practical Physics,” Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy, vol. 8, no. 08, pp. 495–503, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.36348/JAEP.2024.V08I08.003.
E. N. Nyutu, W. W. Cobern, and B. A. S. Pleasants, “Correlational study of student perceptions of their undergraduate laboratory environment with respect to gender and major,” International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 83–102, 2021, doi: 10.46328/IJEMST.1182.
V. Van De Heyde and A. Siebrits, “Digital laboratory report writing, assessment and feedback in the 21st century for an extended curriculum programme for physics,” Research in Science and Technological Education, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 21–52, 2022, doi: 10.1080/02635143.2020.1775571.
D. Doucette and C. Singh, “Gender equity in physics labs,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 20, no. 1, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.20.010102.
J. Day, J. B. Stang, N. G. Holmes, D. Kumar, and D. A. Bonn, “Gender gaps and gendered action in a first-year physics laboratory,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 12, no. 2, 2016, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.12.020104.
C. Miller and J. Roksa, “Balancing Research and Service in Academia: Gender, Race, and Laboratory Tasks,” Gender and Society, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 131–152, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1177/0891243219867917.
K. M. Palmer, M. A. Perkins, and T. F. Slater, “Gender, Equity, and Science Writing: Examining Differences in Undergraduate Life Science Majors’ Attitudes toward Writing Lab Reports,” Educ Sci (Basel), vol. 14, no. 3, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.3390/EDUCSCI14030280.
O. Victor Ajayi and J. Ogbeba, “Effect of Gender on Senior Secondary Chemistry Students’ Achievement in Stoichiometry Using Hands-on Activities,” Am J Educ Res, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 839–842, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.12691/EDUCATION-5-8-1.
J. T. Ajai and T. Ogungbile, “Relationship between laboratory method of teaching, students’ attitude and gender on students’ performance in geometry,” Journal of Research in Instructional, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–12, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.30862/JRI.V3I1.89.
M. Snětinová, P. Kácovský, and J. Machalická, “Hands-on experiments in the interactive physics laboratory: Students’ intrinsic motivation and understanding,” Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 55–75, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.26529/CEPSJ.319.
İ. KURBANOGLU and M. TAKUNYACI, “A Structural Equation Modeling on Relationship Between Self-Efficacy, Physics Laboratory Anxiety and Attitudes,” Journal of Family Counseling and Education, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 47–56, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.32568/JFCE.866649.
A. Asselman, M. Khaldi, and S. Aammou, “Enhancing the prediction of student performance based on the machine learning XGBoost algorithm,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 3360–3379, 2023, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2021.1928235.
S. Jiang, X. Huang, S. H. Sung, and C. Xie, “Learning Analytics for Assessing Hands-on Laboratory Skills in Science Classrooms Using Bayesian Network Analysis,” Res Sci Educ, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 425–444, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1007/S11165-022-10061-X.
J. M. S. Bugarso, R. E. Cabantugan, Q. D. Tapiculin, and A. C. Malaco, “Students’ Learning Experiences and Preference in Performing Science Experiments Using Hands-on and Virtual Laboratory,” Indonesian Journal of Teaching in Science, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 147–152, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.17509/IJOTIS.V1I2.41122.
N. G. Holmes and H. J. Lewandowski, “Investigating the landscape of physics laboratory instruction across North America,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 16, no. 2, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.16.020162.
F. Coştu and H. Bayram, “From cookbook lab to PEODE-based lab: redesigning lab activities to foster conceptual understanding,” Research in Science and Technological Education, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 818–839, 2025, doi: 10.1080/02635143.2024.2342884.
P. Coleman and A. Hosein, “Using voluntary laboratory simulations as preparatory tasks to improve conceptual knowledge and engagement,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 899–912, 2023, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2022.2160969.
Z. Y. Kalender, M. Stein, and N. G. Holmes, “Sense of agency, gender, and students’ perception in open-ended physics labs,” Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, pp. 259–265, 2020, doi: 10.1119/PERC.2020.PR.KALENDER.
M. C. Manyilizu, “Exploring gender-based effects of virtual laboratory against paper-based practices towards real chemistry practical in Tanzanian secondary schools,” African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 206–221, 2023, doi: 10.1080/18117295.2023.2245997.
B. Bligh and M. Flood, “The Change Laboratory in Higher Education: Research-Intervention using Activity Theory,” 2016. doi: 10.1108/s2056-375220150000001007.
T. Espinosa, K. Miller, I. Araujo, and E. Mazur, “Reducing the gender gap in students’ physics self-efficacy in a team- and project-based introductory physics class,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 15, no. 1, May 2019, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.15.010132.
M. Sundstrom, D. G. Wu, C. Walsh, A. B. Heim, and N. Holmes, “Examining the effects of lab instruction and gender composition on intergroup interaction networks in introductory physics labs,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 18, no. 1, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.18.010102.
K. N. Quinn, M. M. Kelley, K. L. Mcgill, E. M. Smith, Z. Whipps, and N. G. Holmes, “Group roles in unstructured labs show inequitable gender divide,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 16, no. 1, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.16.010129.
D. J. Rosen and A. M. Kelly, “Epistemology, socialization, help seeking, and gender-based views in in-person and online, hands-on undergraduate physics laboratories,” Phys Rev Phys Educ Res, vol. 16, no. 2, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.16.020116.
S. Smerdel and M. Z. Hajric, “Demographic characteristics of chemistry teachers in croatia affecting the use of pre-laboratory activities in the classroom,” Acta Chim Slov, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 435–444, 2020, doi: 10.17344/ACSI.2019.5387.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ratika Sekar Ajeng Ananingtyas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
