Making Dioramas of Women Scientists Help Elementary Students Recognize Their Contributions


The STEM movement encourages girls to consider careers in science; however, for success, common misconceptions and biases need to be dispelled, while females’ spatial thinking skills are developed. All students, both girls and boys, need exposure to the accomplishments of women scientists to appreciate their contributions and to envision females as successful scientists. This one-week study conducted during a summer day camp examined upper elementary student (n = 15; 7 females, 8 males) attitudes toward science, women in science, and the possibility of a science career before and after participation in learning about diverse accomplished women scientists and making a diorama showcasing the professional work and caring actions of one of the scientists. The efficacy of this project for upper elementary students, conducted during a summer day camp, is supported by pretest-posttest data and attitude surveys. The five-day class showed positive changes in student plans for a career in science and improved attitudes toward the importance of females becoming scientists. Directions for constructing dioramas, examples of student-made work, and creative scenes made with given craft items are provided.

Share and Cite:

Teske, J. , Gray, P. , Klein, J. and Rule, A. (2014) Making Dioramas of Women Scientists Help Elementary Students Recognize Their Contributions. Creative Education, 5, 1984-2002. doi: 10.4236/ce.2014.523223.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Achieve Inc. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards. Washington DC: Achieve Inc.
[2] American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
[3] Archer, L., DeWitt, J. Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). “Balancing Acts”: Elementary School Girls' Negotiations of Femininity, Achievement, and Science. Science Education, 96, 967-989.
[4] Au, W. (2007). High-Stakes Testing and Curricular Control: A Qualitative Metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267.
[5] Bergen, D., & Pronin Fromberg, D. (2009). Play and Social Interaction in Middle Childhood. Phi Delta Kappan, 90, 426-430.
[6] Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2005). Do Faculty Serve as Role Models? The Impact of Instructor Gender on Female Students. American Economic Review, 92, 152-157.
[7] Chemers, M. M., Zurbriggen, E. L., Syed, M., Goza, B. K., & Bearman, S. (2011). The Role of Efficacy and Identity in Science Career Commitment among Underrepresented Minority Students. Journal of Social Issues, 67, 469-491.
[8] Common Core State Standards Initiative (2012). Implementing the Common Core State Standards.
[9] Correll, S. J. (2004). Constraints into Preferences: Gender, Status, and Emerging Career Aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69, 93-113.
[10] Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of Psychological Testing. New York: Harper & Row.
[11] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper Perennial.
[12] Di Fabio, N. M., Brandi, C., & Frehill, L. M. (2008). Professional Women and Minorities: A Total Human Resources Data Compendium. Washington DC: Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology.
[13] Downs, R., & De Souza, A. (2006). Learning to Think Spatially: GIS as a Support System in the K-12 Curriculum. Washington DC: Committee on the Support for the Thinking Spatially, National Research Council. The National Academies Press.
[14] Dweck, C. (2006). Is Math a Gift? Beliefs That Put Females at Risk. In S. J. Ceci, & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why Aren’t More Women in Science? Top Researchers Debate the Evidence (pp. 47-55). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
[15] Dweck, C. (2008). Mindsets and Math/Science Achievement. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York, Institute for Advanced Study, Commission on Mathematics and Science Education.
[16] Fouad, N. A., Hackett, G., Smith, P. L., Kantamneni, N., Fitzpatrick, M., Haag, S., & Spencer, D. (2010). Barriers and Supports for Continuing in Mathematics and Science: Gender and Educational Level Differences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 361-373.
[17] Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004). Penalties for Success: Reactions to Women Who Succeed at Male Gender-Typed Tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416-427.
[18] Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why Are Women Penalized for Success at Male Tasks? The Implied Communality Deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 81-92.
[19] Hewlett, S. A., Luce, C. B., Servon, L. J., Sherbin, L., Shiller, P., Sosnovich, E., & Sumberg, K. (2008). The Athena Factor: Reversing the Brain Drain in Science, Engineering and Technology. Watertown, MA: Harvard Business School.
[20] Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St Rose, A. (2010). Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington DC: American Association of University Women.
[21] Iowa Department of Education (2013). Iowa Core 21st Century Skills.
[22] Johnson, K. V., & Watson, E. D. (2005). A Historical Chronology of the Plight of African Americans Gaining Recognition in Engineering and Technology. Journal of Technology Studies, 31, 81-93.
[23] Klopp, T. J., Rule, A. C., Schneider, J. S., & Boody, R. M. (2014). Computer Technology-Integrated Projects Should Not Supplant Craft Projects in Science Education. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 865-886.
[24] Leaper, C. L., & Brown, C. S. (2008). Perceived Experiences with Sexism among Adolescent Girls. Child Development, 79, 685-704.
[25] Lightbody, P., & Durndell, A. (1996). The Masculine Image of Careers in Science and Technology—Fact or Fantasy. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 231-246.
[26] Lightbody, P., Siann, G. Stocks, R., & Walsh, D. (1996). Motivation and Attribution at Secondary School: The Role of Gender. Educational Studies, 22, 13-25.
[27] Mead, M., & Métraux, R. (1957). Image of the Scientist among High-School Students. Science, 126, 384-390.
[28] Miller, P. H., Blessing, J. S., & Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender Differences in High-School Students’ Views about Science. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 363-381.
[29] Moyer, M. W. (2014). The Serious Need for Play: Free, Imaginative Play Is Crucial for Normal Social, Emotional, and Cognitive Development. It Makes Us Better Adjusted, Smarter, and Less Stressed. Scientific American Mind, 23, 78-85.
[30] Munro, M., & Elsom, D. (2000). Choosing Science at 16: The Influences of Science Teachers and Careers Advisors on Students’ Decisions about Science Subjects and Science and Technology Careers. Cambridge: National Institute for Careers Education and Counseling.
[31] National Science Foundation (2008). Science and Engineering Degrees: 1966-2006. Arlington, VA: Division of Science Resources Statistics.
[32] National Science Foundation (2009). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering. Arlington, VA: Division of Science Resources Statistics.
[33] Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Harvesting Implicit Group Attitudes and Beliefs from a Demonstration Web Site. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 101-115.
[34] Perna, L., Lundy-Wagner, V., Drezner, N. D., Gasman, M., Yoon, S., Bose, E., & Gary, S. (2009). The Contribution of HBCUs to the Preparation of African American Women for STEM Careers: A Case Study. Research in Higher Education, 50, 1-23.
[35] The Research Business (1994). Views of Science among Students, Teachers and Parents. Institution of Electrical Engineers.
[36] Root-Bernstein, R. S., & Root-Bernstein, M. M. (2013). The Art and Craft of Science: Scientific Discovery and Innovation Can Depend on Engaging More Students in the Arts. Educational Leadership, 70, 16-21.
[37] Shettle, C., Roey, S., Mordica, J., Perkins, R., Nord, C., Teodorovic, J., Lyons, M., Averett, C., Kastberg, D., & Brown, J. (2007). The Nation’s Report Card [TM]: America’s High School Graduates. National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 2007-467, Washington DC: US Department of Education.
[38] Simard, C., Henderson, A. D., Gilmartin, S. K., Schiebinger, L., & Whitney, T. (2008). Climbing the Technical Ladder: Obstacles and Solutions for Mid-Level Women in Technology. Stanford, CA: Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research, Stanford University, and Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology.
[39] Singer, D. G., & Singer, J. L. (2006). Fantasy and Imagination. In D. P. Fromberg, & D. Bergen (Eds.), Play from Birth to 12: Contexts, Perspectives, and Meanings (pp. 371-378). New York: Routledge.
[40] Sorby, S. A. (2009). Educational Research in Developing 3-D Spatial Skills for Engineering Students. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 459-480.
[41] Sorby, S. A., & Baartmans, B. J. (2000). The Development and Assessment of a Course for Enhancing the 3-D Spatial Visualization Skills of First Year Engineering Students. Journal of Engineering Education, 89, 301-307.
[42] Spohn, C. (2008). Teacher Perspectives on No Child Left Behind and Arts Education: A Case Study. Arts Education Policy Review, 109, 3-12.
[43] Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magnitude of Sex Differences in Spatial Abilities: A Meta-Analysis and Consideration of Critical Variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250-270.

Copyright © 2021 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.