Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-dknvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-03T13:43:58.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Virtues of Engendering Quantitative Methods Courses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 July 2016

Tània Verge*
Universitat Pompeu Fabra


Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
The Teacher Symposium: Mainstreaming Gender in the Teaching and Learning of Politics
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Adeney, Katharine and Carey, Sean. 2009. “Contextualising the Teaching of Statistics in Political Science.” Politics 29 (3): 193200.Google Scholar
Ackerly, Brooke and Mügge, Liza. 2016. “Mainstreaming Gender in the Teaching and Learning of Politics.” PS: Political Science & Politics. This issue.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Jeffrey L. and Thomas Allen, Brooke. 2013. “Overcoming Methods Anxiety: Qualitative First, Quantitative Next, Frequent Feedback along the Way.” Journal of Political Science Education 9 (1): 115.Google Scholar
Boaler, Jo. 1998. “Mathematical Equity—Underachieving Boys or Sacrificial Girls?” International Journal of Inclusive Education 2 (2): 119–34.Google Scholar
Buchler, Justin. 2009. “Teaching Quantitative Methodology to the Math Averse.” PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (3): 527–30.Google Scholar
Buscemi, William I. 1997. “Numbers? Borrinnnggg!!!” PS: Political Science & Politics 30 (4): 737–42.Google Scholar
Campbell, Rosie and Childs, Sarah. 2014. “Parents in Parliament: ‘Where’s Mum?’” The Political Quarterly 85 (4): 487–92.Google Scholar
Foster, Emma, Kerr, Peter, Hopkins, Anthony, Byrne, Christopher, and Ahall, Linda. 2013. “The Personal is not Political: At Least in the UK’s Top Politics and IR Departments.” British Journal of Politics & International Relations 15 (4): 566–85.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra, ed. 1987. Feminism and Methodology: Social Science Issues. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy and Leavy, Patricia Lina, eds. 2007. Feminist Research Practice: A Primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Ho, Daniel E. and Kelman, Mark G.. 2014. “Does Class Size Affect the Gender Gap? A Natural Experiment in Law.” The Journal of Legal Studies 43 (2): 291321.Google Scholar
Lovenduski, Joni. 1998. “Gendering Research in Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 1: 333–56.Google Scholar
Matthes, Melissa. 2013. “Conclusion and Rejoinders.” Politics & Gender 9 (2): 235–38.Google Scholar
Mendelberg, Tali, Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Goedert, Nicholas. 2013. “Does Descriptive Representation Facilitate Women’s Distinctive Voice? How Gender Composition and Decision Rules Affect Deliberation.” American Journal of Political Science 58 (2): 291306.Google Scholar
Metso, Milka and Le Feuvre, Nicky. 2006. Quantitative Methods for Analysing Gender, Ethnicity and Migration. Integrative Research Methods. University of York. Online access, retrieved September 24th, 2015: Google Scholar
Morrison, Zoë, Bourke, Mary, and Kelly, Caroline. 2005. “‘Stop Making It Such a Big Issue’: Perceptions and Experiences of Gender Inequality by Undergraduates at a British University.” Women’s Studies International Forum 28 (2–3): 150–62.Google Scholar
Mügge, Liza M. ed. Symposium “Gender in European Political Science Education. Taking Stock and Future Directions.” European Political Science. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Olsen, Wendy K., Purdam, Kingsley, and Afkhami, Reza. 2009. “Gender Equality? Approaches and Quantitative Evidence Sources for Understanding the Circumstances of Men and Women in the UK”. Radical Statistics 99: 1233.Google Scholar
Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Wilson, Vicki A.. 2003. “Statistics Anxiety: Nature, Etiology, Antecedents, Effects, and Treatments—A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.” Teaching in Higher Education 8 (2): 195209.Google Scholar
Ryan, Matt, Saunders, Clare, Rainsford, Emily, and Thompson, Emma. 2014. “Improving Research Methods Teaching and Learning in Politics and International Relations: A ‘Reality Show’ Approach.” Politics 34 (1): 8597.Google Scholar
Slootmaeckers, Koen, Kerremans, Bart, and Adriaensen, Johan. 2014. “Too Afraid to Learn: Attitudes towards Statistics as a Barrier to Learning Statistics and to Acquiring Quantitative Skills.” Politics 34 (2): 191200.Google Scholar
Spencer, Steven J., Steele, Claude M., and Quinn, Diane M.. 2009. “Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35 (1): 428.Google Scholar
Spierings, Niels. 2012. “The Inclusion of Quantitative Techniques and Diversity in the Mainstream of Feminist Research.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 19 (3): 331–47.Google Scholar
Weldon, S. Laurel. 2014. “Using Statistical Methods to Study Institutions.” Politics & Gender 10 (4): 661–72.Google Scholar
Winn, Sandra. 1995. “Learning by Doing: Teaching Research Methods through Student Participation in a Commissioned Research Project.” Studies in Higher Education 20 (2): 203–14.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Verge supplementary material

Appendix 1

Download Verge supplementary material(File)
File 97 KB
Supplementary material: File

Verge supplementary material

Appendix 2

Download Verge supplementary material(File)
File 81 KB
Supplementary material: File

Verge supplementary material

Appendix 3

Download Verge supplementary material(File)
File 77 KB

A correction has been issued for this article: