Behind the Desk, in Front of the Screen: The Perspective of Future Teachers on Gender and Technology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7346/-fei-XXIV-01-26_09Keywords:
Stereotypes, Gender, Pre-service teachers, Inclusion, STEMAbstract
A growing body of research has analyzed the causes of women’s underrepresentation in STEM, with particular attention to technological professions. Among the most significant factors are gender stereotypes, which negatively affect girls’ confidence and self-efficacy from early childhood. The digital gender divide further contributes to directing educational choices toward the humanities, thereby reducing opportunities to access STEM careers and, in the long run, exacerbating pay and employment inequalities. Within this framework, the present study was carried out with a group of students enrolled in the Master’s Degree Program in Primary Education Sciences at the Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, during a Laboratory of Educational Technologies. Using qualitative methods - including participant observation, paper-and-pencil drawing, and a focus group - the first findings were collected. Results reveal an ambivalent relationship with digital technologies, stereotypical gendered representations, and, at the same time, an awareness of the importance of adopting an inclusive approach to teaching.
References
A. Contarello. (2009). Il genere della scienza: Una lettura psicosociale della sottorappresentazione delle donne nell’universo scientifico e tecnologico. In Gruppo di Studio sulle Disparità di Genere (Ed.). Le questioni sui generi in psicologia sociale: Abstract book (pp. 125–137). Uninova.
Adler, L. (1982). Children’s drawings as an indicator of individual preferences reflecting group values: A programmatic study. In L. L. Adler (Ed.). Cross-cultural research at issue (pp. 71–98). Academic Press.
Baiata, C. (2023). Insegnanti pre-service e STEM: Atteggiamenti e stereotipi di genere tra gli studenti e le studentesse del Corso di Laurea in Scienze della Formazione Primaria dell’Università di Bologna. In G. Moretti, A. La Marca, & I. Vannini (Eds.). La ricerca educativa e didattica nelle scuole di dottorato in Italia (pp. 42–61). Pensa MultiMedia. Retrieved January 6, 2026, from https://www.pensamultimedia.it/libro/9791255681533
Baiata, C. (2024). Insegnanti pre-service e STEM: Atteggiamenti e stereotipi di genere tra gli studenti e le studentesse del Corso di Laurea in Scienze della Formazione Primaria dell’Università di Bologna. Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna. Doctoral dissertation. https://doi.org/10.48676/unibo/amsdottorato/11471
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
Barbagli, M., & Dei, M. (1969). Le vestali della classe media: Ricerca sociologica sugli insegnanti. Il Mulino.
Berra, M., & Cavaletto, G. M. (Eds.). (2019). Scienza e tecnologia: Superare il gender gap. Un’indagine a Torino. Ledizioni.
Calvani, A. (2014). Innovare la formazione dei maestri: Il ruolo del tirocinio per lo sviluppo di expertise didattica. In P. Federighi, & V. Boffo (Eds.). Primaria oggi: Complessità e professionalità docente (pp. 46–52). Firenze University Press.
Cattani, L. (2024). Separate e diseguali: La segregazione occupazionale di genere nell’area STEM e le dinamiche di chiusura all’accesso delle donne. EGEA.
Cavagnuolo, M., Fasanella, A., & Parziale, F. (2024). Fiducia nei nuovi media e pratiche digitali tra il primo lockdown e l’avvio della campagna vaccinale: Analisi dei processi cognitivi e delle pratiche collettive in una prospettiva longitudinale e mixed methods. FrancoAngeli.
Chambers, D. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test. Science Education, 67(2), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730670213
Cheryan, S., Master, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2015). Cultural stereotypes as gatekeepers: Increasing girls’ interest in computer science and engineering by diversifying stereotypes. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 49. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00049
Commissione Europea. (2020). Strategia per la parità di genere 2020–2025. https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/gender-equality/gender-equality-strategy_it
Corbetta, P. (1999). Metodologia e tecniche della ricerca sociale. Il Mulino.
Denessen, E., Hornstra, L., van den Bergh, L., & Bijlstra, G. (2020). Implicit measures of teachers’ attitudes and stereotypes, and their effects on teacher practice and student outcomes: A review. Learning and Instruction, 66, Article 101437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101437
DM 249/2010. (2010). Decreto ministeriale 10 settembre 2010, n. 249: Definizione della disciplina dei requisiti e delle modalità della formazione iniziale degli insegnanti della scuola dell'infanzia, della scuola primaria e della scuola secondaria di primo e secondo grado, ai sensi dell'articolo 2, comma 416, della legge 24 dicembre 2007, n. 244. Retrieved February 17, 2026, from https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2011/01/31/011G0014/sg
Finson, K. D. (2002). Drawing a scientist: What we do and do not know after fifty years of drawings. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb18217.x
Gavaldon, G., & McGarr, O. (2019). Exploring pre-service teachers’ future intentions to use technology through the use of comics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 83, 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.04.004
Grassi, V., & Nardi, L. (2025). Accesso ancora negato: Discipline STEM, processi di esclusione e inclusione delle donne e strategie per l’empowerment femminile. The Lab’s Quarterly, 26, 17–44. https://doi.org/10.13131/unipi/78en-zw13
Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.3
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4
Guerrini, V. (2015). La dimensione di genere nella professionalità docente: Prospettive per un rinnovamento delle competenze degli/lle insegnanti dai risultati di una ricerca in Toscana. Formazione & Insegnamento, 13(2), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.7346/-fei-XIII-02-15_22
Gullberg, A., Andersson, K., Danielsson, A., Scantlebury, K., & Hussénius, A. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ views of the child—Reproducing or challenging gender stereotypes in science in preschool. Research in Science Education, 48, 691–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9593-z
Jimoyiannis, A., & Komis, V. (2008). Examining teachers’ beliefs about ICT in education: Implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development, 11(2), 149–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530701414779
Ladner, S. (2019). Mixed methods: A short guide to applied mixed methods research. Sam Ladner.
Lomholt, R. (2025). What is ‘teacher awareness’ and can teachers use it to overcome their expectation bias?–A thematic analysis of research. Social Psychology of Education, 28(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-024-09999-9
Marone, F., & Buccini, F. (2022). New inequalities in the contemporary era: Girls and STEM. Education Sciences & Society, 13(1), 170–184. https://doi.org/10.3280/ess1-2022oa13572
Martinez, J. J. (2025). The Long-Term Effects of Teachers’ Gender Stereotypes on Labor Outcomes. Institute of Labor Economics (IZA). Retrieved January 6, 2026, from https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/17674/the-long-term-effects-of-teachers-gender-stereotypes-on-labor-outcomes
Master, A. (2021). Gender stereotypes influence children’s STEM motivation. Child Development Perspectives, 15(3), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12424
McKinsey. (2023). Women in tech: The best bet to solve Europe’s talent shortage. McKinsey. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/mckinsey-digital/our-insights/women-in-tech-the-best-bet-to-solve-europes-talent-shortage
MIUR. Educare al rispetto: Per la parità tra i sessi, la prevenzione della violenza di genere e di tutte le forme di discriminazione. MIUR. Retrieved February 17, 2026, from https://www.miur.gov.it/documents/20182/0/Linee+guida+Comma16+finale.pdf/
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170741
Pellizzoni, S. (2025). Accendere la passione per le STEM tra le giovani generazioni. In S. Avveduto (Ed.). Rapporto GETA 2024: Inclusione & Diversità: Donne e scienza (pp. 21–28). CNR. Retrieved January 6, 2026, from https://www.cnr.it/sites/default/files/public/media/attivita/editoria/Rapporto_GETA2024_IRPPS_Avveduto_testo.pdf
Pitino, A. (2019). Il diritto all’educazione di genere dei bambini e delle bambine: Interventi normativi e politiche per favorire un “dream up” lavorativo senza stereotipi di genere. CREIS European Research. Retrieved February 17, 2026, from http://www.creiseuropeanresearch.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/PITINO-IL-DIRITTO-ALL%E2%80%99EDUCAZIONE-DI-GENERE-.pdf
Poggio, B. (2024). Il divario di genere delle discipline STEM: Un quadro introduttivo. In B. Poggio, T. Calarco, M. Dapor, P. Salomoni, & C. Tamanini (Eds.). Atti della Accademia Roveretana degli Agiati. Classe di Scienze Matematiche, Fisiche e Naturali (pp. 193–202). Accademia Roveretana degli Agiati. Retrieved January 6, 2026, from https://media.agiati.org/page/attachments/poggio-atti-b-accademia-roveretana-agiati-2024.pdf
Rodeschini, G., & Selmi, G. (2020). Studi di genere, saperi femministi ed emancipatory social sciences: Appunti per un possibile dialogo. In G. Rodeschini, & G. Selmi (Eds.). Emancipatory social sciences: Appunti per un possibile dialogo (pp. 137–146). Orthotes. http://digital.casalini.it/4810251
Rule, A. C., Bisbo, E. L., & Waloven, V. (2008). Preservice elementary teachers’ images of inventors. ERIC. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED501245
Scandurra, C., Picariello, S., Valerio, P., & Amodeo, A. L. (2017). Sexism, homophobia and transphobia in a sample of Italian pre-service teachers: The role of socio-demographic features. Journal of Education for Teaching, 43(2), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2017.1286794
Shapiro, J. R., & Williams, A. M. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66, 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0
Sultan, U., Axell, C., & Hallström, J. (2019). Girls’ engagement with technology education: A scoping review of the literature. Design and Technology Education, 24(2), 20–41. https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/view/2609
Sultan, U. N., Axell, D. C., & Hallström, J. (2020). Technical or not? Investigating the self-image of girls aged 9 to 12 when participating in primary technology education. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 25(2), 175–191.
Thébaud, S., & Charles, M. (2018). Segregation, stereotypes, and STEM. Social Sciences, 7, 111. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7070111
Tomasetto, C., Galdi, S., & Cadinu, M. (2012). Quando l’implicito precede l’esplicito: Gli stereotipi di genere sulla matematica in bambine e bambini di 6 anni. Psicologia Sociale, 2, 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1482/37693
United Nations. (2020). Sustainable development goals: Guidelines. Retrieved January 6, 2026, from https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2%3C137::AID-TEA1001%3E3.0.CO;2-U
Virtanen, S., Räikkönen, E., & Ikonen, P. (2014). Gender-based motivational differences in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9278-8
Wolf, S., & Brown, A. (2023). Teacher beliefs and student learning. Human Development, 67(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1159/000529450
World Economic Forum. (2025). The future of jobs report 2025. World Economic Forum.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Claudia Baiata
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Formazione & insegnamento is distributed under Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
For further details, please refer to our Repository & Archiving Policy, as well as our Copyright & Licensing Terms.
