As an elementary teacher and as an artist in residence
working with art and technology, I have had many occasions to observe the
interaction of boys and girls with computers and with each other. I have
pondered a comment made by Matisse.
Our senses have a developmental age which is not that of the immediate
environment, but that of the period into which we were born. We are born
with the sensibility of that period, that phase of civilization, and it
counts for more than anything learning can give us.
What opportunities for learning does this period of civilization offer
to its students? Are students' senses restricted by the era of technology
into which they are born? Contemporary sources point to the influence of
the computer in narrowing popular models of thinking (Chandler, 1992; Streibel,
1985). The literature from which I draw indicates the dominance of the
male within technology settings (Rothschild, 1983 and 1988; Sanders &
Stone, 1986; Seifert, Gerbner & Fisher, 1989). Feminist theory often
aims to bring those who are marginalized to the center. Feminist pedagogy
also attempts to reveal how various technologies can encourage or discourage
the process of giving centered voice to marginalized people (Felski, 1989;
Yeaman, Koetting, & Nichols, 1994). My choice to select girls for this
study was lodged in these foundations. This decision was further encouraged
by the research done by Krendl, Broihier, and Fleetwood (1989) which revealed
that girls were less interested in computers and less confident in their
computer skills even when they had as much experience with the technology
as boys. This quantitative study addressed four areas of interest: student
confidence in use of computers, student interest in learning about and
in using them, student perceptions of the value of computers, and depth
of student experience with computers. Their findings demonstrated that
boys and girls respond differently to computers even as they gain experience
with them over time. According to the authors, this suggests that encouraging
girls to participate in more computer activities may not be sufficient
to determine where the problem lies - with the computer or in the social
context in which the activities occur.
Looking at "how" rather than "more", my research investigates
the interaction of girls with technology. Through an aesthetic framework,
this paper gives witness to the experiences of young girls with classroom
computers. This paper addresses the following issues: what do I mean by
aesthetics, questions that guide my research, my philosophical framework,
what my research consists of, research findings, and implications for educators.
Aesthetics
My understanding, appreciation, and use of the term aesthetics draws from interpretations such as Dewey's which are inclusive of pragmatic choices in daily situations. By aesthetics I mean that combination of information and imagination which students apply when making purposeful decisions regarding meaning and pleasure. This interpretation extends beyond any single curricula area and necessitates an attention in all areas of learning.
How do aesthetics relate to learning? Aesthetics provides a mode of making meaning and sense of the world. Meanings are ways of relating to things and reflect a certain way of attending. This attention can be examined in students' experiences with computers and can provide insight to their learning. The essential nature of technology itself as it relates to girls' experiences forms a central concern. What is the field of possibilities as determined by the student? Educational issues extend beyond questions of whether computers are a more efficient means for transferring empirical knowledge or whether computers contribute to an overall improvement of student products. Of greater interest is the examination of girls' perspectives. What choices, what range of possibilities, do girls see in computers?
Questions posed by Maxine Greene (1992) are appropriate
here for pointing out the significance in raising questions about girls'
experiences with computers. Are we nurturing imaginative aesthetic encounters
for students to be fully present to learning, to create new knowledge,
and to explore and illuminate what is there to be realized and achieved?
Dewey (1934) claimed that aesthetic experience is a model for all experience,
an ideal model, to which all other experience should aspire. Further rendering
of the significance of aesthetic experience to learning and life can be
found in the works of Allen, 1995; Arnstein, 1970; Dorn, 1994; Eisner,
1976; Ernst, 1994; and Gallas, 1992.
I believe that students aesthetic experiences are desirable examples of
being truly open to learning. These aesthetic experiences are shaped by
the aesthetics inherent in technology as well as by socio-cultural and
historical patterns. As I observed girls at the computer many questions
came to mind. To serve my research purposes I narrowed them down to the
following:What are the multiple forms of young girls' engagement with computers?
What aesthetic choices do girls make with computers and what contributes
to this choice making? How do girls position themselves in their aesthetic
experiences with computers?
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework which shaped this inquiry was
derived in part by pragmatic beliefs in the interrelatedness of theory
and action. I also support a social constructivist stance in which meaning
is negotiated and formed within a community. Contemporary feminists have
identified concerns for who "speaks" in qualitative research
studies. Whose voice is heard and how is it amplified? In this study our
stories are interwoven. My voice responds to that of the students as they
share their ideas through words, drawings and symbols. By establishing
the students' voice as an authorial presence within the text, I am striving
to achieve a collaborative 'signature' or writerly identity. As noted by
Witherell and Noddings (1991), "As chroniclers of our own stories,
we write to create ourselves, to give voice to our experiences, to learn
who we are and who we have been" (p.111). This is significant to this
study because it also serves a greater purpose for these girls' voices
-"adding to the collective voice we call culture"(Witherell and
Noddings, 1991, p. 111).
About the Study
This research took place in an elementary school in central Wisconsin.
A look at the ethnic diversity of the 4476 students enrolled in the district
show a ratio of American Indian .5%, Black 2.0%, Asian or Pacific Islander
1.5%, Hispanic 1.0%, and White 95%. Data were collected through multiple
forms: observation, individual interviews, focus interviews, symbolic representational
interviews, videotapes of activities at the computer, joint viewing of
the video with students, drawings by students and their follow up discussions,
readings by students of their transcribed interviews, and a close study,
including a video, of the aesthetic engagement of two girls. Each method
of data collection was selected to contribute a specific component towards
full data analysis. For purposes of this paper I will focus primarily on
information gathered through the Symbolic Representation Interviews. The
manner in which information presents itself influences what information
is revealed. This method of eliciting information incorporated a vital
metaphoric component.
In the symbol the particular represents the general,
not as a dream, not as a shadow,
but as a living and momentary revelation of the inscrutable.
W. Goethe
Symbolic Representation Interviews (SRI)
In this section I would like to acknowledge the contributions gathered through symbolic representation interviews. These provided a wealth of visual clues from which are drawn many of my conclusions. While each of the research methods contributed its specific story form to the study analysis, the metaphoric attributes of this process enabled students to transform their visualizations into tangible form. This research tool proved valuable for extending and revealing students' complex, and often unspoken, conceptualizations of their aesthetic experiences with computers. This research method (Enciso, 1990) encourages reflection through visualization of ideas. Much value has been attributed to the role of images in the shaping of thought (Arnheim, 1969; Gowen, 1978). Because this study focuses on aesthetic perception, aesthetic judgment, and aesthetic experience, strategies were chosen to enable students to gain access to creative inner processes. Research on creativity indicates that a reliance on words alone could lead to a certain rigidity of thought (Koestler, 1964). Symbolic representation interviews utilize both language and symbolic visual imagery to form supportive bridges for communication.
In the symbolic representation interviews, I asked students to create symbols to represent such things as their experiences with computers. This differed from asking them to draw, which would entail the application of visual art principles. When drawing, most children of upper elementary and middle school age strive to achieve a photographic reality to their drawings. They strive to include a high degree of detail. Symbols reduce the number of variables. Through simplification, the essential elements surface. Symbols ask students to think metaphorically. Symbols give concrete form to the abstract visualization of intricate relationships.
Key questions provided a focus, such as "What do you try to pay attention to when you are working at a computer?" I participated in the process with students by creating my own symbols. Next, I invited students to use verbal language to share the inner processes represented in their symbols. Their verbal responses were reflective, drawing from nonlinear interpretive levels. These opportunities facilitated their introspection and their ability to express the multiplicity of their aesthetic experiences.
Ruth shared with me, "Um, I have a lot of things
I think about. I came up with six. The first one is what shape I am going
to do, or what I am going to do. And the second thing is what tools I am
going to use, like a pencil or a thing to make straight lines. Or if I
am going to color it. Or whatever. And my third thought is what color is
it going to be. And then the fourth one is quality, like how it, how it
looks. Not detail but just if it looks like it is supposed to look. And
my fifth one is I've got to get it done! That I won't take forever. And
the sixth one is detail."
The sophisticated level of processing that Ruth had exhibited was quite
extraordinary. All of the examples shared by students of their inner processes
compare effectively with portions of a model for aesthetics derived from
Beardsley: attention to a sensuous field; awareness of form; awareness
of regional quality; sense of active discovery; sense of accomplishment
(Beardsley, 1970). Through the students' creation of symbols we were provided
access to their intuitive and non verbal ways of knowing and making meaning.
What the Research Revealed
Students' experiences revealed an integration of both cognitive & perceptual
responses of playfulness, repetition, daydreaming & fantasy. Emerging
themes indicated girls' identification of their realm of possibilities.
They preferred experiencing software applications as themselves rather
than being provided key figures from which they could choose to identify.
Their vivid use of imaginative fantasy placed themselves as the key participants.
In an interview with Lisa, she identified features of her favorite game
Myst.
"Well it's the graphics and everything. It is so cool. It looks likely.
Um, you don't see yourself, though because anybody can play it. Like it's
not like the game is sexist. So, um, that's kind of nice."
Since Lisa was the first to make a reference to sexism, I was eager to
hear what this term implied to her and how it contributed to her enjoyment
of computer applications. She provided me with a glimpse of her values
and preferences in the following excerpt.
"Well, you're just looking out. It's like you are
looking from your own eyes, but you don't see your body or anything. It's
not like something where you are in there with a joystick and you are moving
around you are actually seeing. Um, it's really just a bunch of pictures,
and you click somewhere and it jumps one picture ahead, so like you close
your eyes, you walk there, and you open them again and you are in that
place. It's kind of neat."
In response to a question about the positioning of girls in other games
she responded, "Well we have err, a Math Workshop. It, well there
are a lot of games that are nonsexist. But I mean, the adventure games,
most of them, they have a little person in a scene moving around with a
joy stick. Like, um, the King's Quest series. This king, we have King's
Quest Five, I think it is, and there 's no, it's just hard. It came with
a hint book, so we know how to do it now, but we never really finished
it. It's kind of boring, you know. It's frustrating."
"So would you say King's Quest is an example of something that is
sexist?"
"Yah. . . But. . .well . . ."
"In what way is Kings Quest sexist? "
"Well, the people. Like, in some games there will be a man, well there
is, wait, I think there's three characters that are in the whole thing:
there's Rozella, Prince Alexander and King Graham. And so you can't really
imagine yourself in there, you have to imagine that you are that person
and look out of their eyes and it's kind of weird."
Later she said, "I just think it's nice that you don't see what yourself looks like so you can just pretend that you are actually in there doing those things. Because you have to think for yourself."
When asked to elaborate she went on, "It's not really
fair because in most adventure games there's a man that's on the quest,
or a prince or somebody and not usually a woman. So um, like Joe of the
Jungle I kind of like that because for once there is a woman in the adventure
game. It's actually a video game but it has one in it."
In a later focus interview with her classmates, I asked if there were others
who shared this concern. I raised the question, "Lisa had mentioned
that she thought some software was sexist. Have you girls experienced any
that you would consider sexist?"
This may have made Lisa self-conscious because she interjected,"Well,
it's not that sexist. In some things they have programs that have only
a man but, um, you can't choose who you want to be."
I asked, "How about how they are represented? Are they the kinds of
characters you would like to be, whether you are a man or a woman?"
Lisa laughed, "No."
This conversation contributes to girls' experiences of boundaries in the realm of possible and impossible. Lisa's concerns around sexism included concerns for the role she herself would like to play at the computer, the quality of roles from which she would like to be able to select or choose for personal participation, the roles of females that are portrayed with whom she would be interacting, and the visibility of women in games. In "Meeting at the Crossroads" Brown and Gilligan (1992) reveal a silencing that occurs, a series of disconnections or dissociations, which, through their extensive interviews with early adolescents, they had observed happening. I question here whether in fact Lisa was twice silenced. First, in her perceptions of isolation from others who might share a common concern for the issue of sexism in computer applications. The fact that these concerns were not part of her open discussion with others raises questions about hidden bias and unintentional lessons.
Second, Lisa had described her interest in projecting
herself, as herself, into the role, rather than assuming the characteristics
of a figure that was seen on the screen. Of the experiences she had, she
was only able to do this in one application. For me, this raises further
questions of identity. Limited endorsement of herself, as an individual,
was perceived. She clearly valued those opportunities in which she could
"just pretend that you are actually in there doing those things. Because
you have to think for yourself" over alternative experiences in which
she had to assume the characteristics of a previously externally designed
figure.
During the symbolic representation interview I asked, "Draw a symbol
that represents yourself when you are working with the computer. How do
you feel in relation to it? Are you inside the program, inside the screen,
outside, walking alongside, running alongside? Their responses revealed
a multiplicity within their aesthetic experiences. Note the strong connections
with multiple and simultaneous feelings that are expressed in the following
scanned images of their artwork.
Angie portrays herself on a path within the computer screen while she simultaneously
clicks the mouse from her stance of control outside the computer. Angie
explained, "My picture is, like I play the game Myst all the
time. And it is like you are moving with it when you click on where you
want to go. It doesn't show a little person. It's like you're moving. So
I feel like I am in there. Moving."
Erin explained her dualistic symbols, "Mine is, there
is a picture of me because often times when I am playing a game and I can't
quite get into it, I just, I want to play it and everything but also sometimes
my mind wanders away and I see what other people are doing and stuff."
Levels of involvement often were determined by feelings of motivation.
They could be in trying to get out, or out, trying to get in. Lisa spoke
of her design, "Well for some games I um, it feels like I am
outside. It just depends. Like in this picture I am outside the screen
and I am trying to get in. Like I am not really having that much fun. And
the other picture is I'm in and I'm trying to get out. Like it is so fun
I just can't get away from the computer. Because it feels like I am actually
there."
Kary explained, "Um, this small picture is of me being pulled into
the computer. And this one is me trying to stop being pulled too far into
the computer."
This element of "too far" showed up on other occasions. Girls
expressed a fear that something was either too fun or too compelling in
an activity at the computer and perhaps was beyond their control. This
reminded me of Whitman.
There Was A Child Went Forth
There was a child went forth every day,
And the first object he looked upon
and received with wonder or pity or love or dread,
that object he became.
And that object became part of him for the day,
or a certain part of the day. . .
or for many years or stretching cycles of years.
Walt Whitman
Leaves of Grass, p. 138
As objects, computers extend an ambiance into the arena of learning. How
are these objects interpreted by girls? Was the fear of getting caught
up in computers a gendered response? Yet, while depicting fear of getting
caught up with computers, girls drew symbols portraying themselves simultaneously
inside and outside the computer. Students constructed new ways of understanding
and interpreting through their interaction with computers. By investigating
the aesthetic nature of these experiences we move closer to achieving a
wholesome integration of students perceptions and responses.
Girls need to be affirmed in their skills, interests, and emerging styles
(Gilligan, Lyons, & Hanmer, 1990). The experiences of girls working
with computers were not always affirmations. Here are some stories that
demonstrate girls responses to those instances. When asked, "Do you
think that your ideas when you are working at the computer get as much
respect or attention as boys' ideas when they are working at the computer?"
Kary said, "My picture shows a teacher and she is looking at the girl's
computer and the boy is kind of scribbling away. And the girl is like taking
a long time to make something that looks good."
The concept of boys rushing their drawings and girls adding more detail
was repeated by other girls. Erin said, "Well, mine is like, the girls
do a lot more on their screen and stuff. The boys like mine, they just
do a little dot sometimes. They don't do as much. And they get a lot more
attention for it."
Ruth interjected, "Well, I feel both ways. Like girls
get attention and so do boys. But I think sometimes boys, it's kind of
better because girls are like, they have really detailed stuff and then
the teacher says, 'Now,' and then the name, 'you need to work harder because
I know quality when I see it.' And they expect more from girls, or the
person because they always get A's or B's. But then with the boys they
just draw a stupid picture of like a tree on the computer and with a bird
that doesn't even look like a bird and the teacher is saying, 'Great job.
Very realistic'. So. . ."
Her statement about the preferences of teachers reminded me of the conclusions
by Swann (1992). Amongst the range of ways in which gender differentiation
is maintained in the classroom, she listed teacher preferences. This brought
me back to Ruth's indicator of "different expectations". This
lends significance to this study of aesthetic experiences because of potential
effects on student self-perception and their self-confidence in the risk
taking behavior necessary for creative endeavors.
Students' aesthetic experiences at computers reflected
the broader socio-cultural picture of how they constructed their understandings
within the framework of lived experiences. In girls' use of computers,
interpersonal relations were highly regarded as a factor contributing to
their aesthetic enjoyment. This evidenced itself in the following ways.
While games were remembered with great detail and were considered of top
priority, Nancy described them as being not that funny if you played them
alone. Playing them with someone else made them funnier. As other girls
exhibited similar preferences for interpersonal sharing of the computer
game experience, their choices crossed from the realm of computer/human
interaction, to the realm of human/human interaction, with the computer
as an enabling device. As they shared their appreciation for on-line activities,
Jan and Kary's aesthetic choices were based on the communicative process.
Their sense of "being there" was a sense of being with the other
person, being with the person with whom they were communicating. Computers
took on a secondary interest, with their communications of primary significance.
New questions that have been raised and recommendations for further research
This study was based on the assumption that aesthetics contribute to the formation of knowledge and that knowledge of the aesthetic experiences of students at computers is valuable for educational decision making. Aesthetic experiences are situated within a culture. The influences of this study have remained within the Western cultural context, and the study itself took place in a midwestern community. Other cultures have much to offer to our increased understanding of students' learning through aesthetic experiences with computers. At a time when technology is supposedly contributing to the creation of a global community, further studies of students' aesthetic and computer experiences need to extend beyond the dominant cultural paradigm. This community of users was described as "upper end" by the classroom teacher. What might this study reveal if it were replicated with students who represent greater diversity in class, race, and ethnicity?
Girls were motivated by metaphoric thinking through which
their abstract concepts could emerge in a materialistic form. Teachers'
modeling through metaphors can alter students' perceptions towards educational
technology. Greene (1978) encourages teaching and learning situations in
which time is devoted to the recognition and invention of metaphors. Authors
such as Brenda Laurel (1991) in "The Computer as Theater" have
made attempts to categorize educational technology in metaphoric ways and
to transfer schemata between realms. This bridging is helpful and illuminating
for educators in considering their own metaphoric framework when working
with computers and students.
Research techniques, such as the Symbolic Representation Interview method,
need to be created, developed, and utilized to enable further research
to encompass nonverbal spatial and multiple forms of knowledge. The collection,
analysis, and presentation of data through diverse nonverbal means contributes
to a greater understanding of the multiple ways of knowing and learning.
There are implications in this study for those involved with the design and production of educational technological applications. As evidenced by the studies of Gigliotti (1993), the aesthetics of interactive technological design requires ethical as well as technical considerations. This includes accepting responsibility for such things as the impact of choices which are offered to students. Use of metaphors reflect interconnections between technology and people as well as interconnections within a culture. In making choices available to students through computers, considerations must encompass the interests, needs, and aesthetics of diversified multi-cultural populations. Resistance to the conditional metaphors already in place would contribute to these students' aesthetics.
Within computer applications, greater opportunities need to be provided for students to interact on a personal level, as themselves, rather than as previously defined and limited characters. In reference to what she considers dehumanizing metaphors currently in place, Gigliotti suggests, ". . . the evolvement of technological aesthetics should focus on actions and interactions that recognize and challenge those metaphors" (Gigliotti, 1993, p. 5). Lisa was not alone in her desire to interact with computers on a more personal level. Both Kary and Jan valued the direct communications of on-line chatter. Other students distinguished their experiences that allow for self initiation, as with creative applications of hypertext and art, as providing a sense of accomplishment.
In summary, this study reinforced the vision of students'
engagement in new relationships to learning through technology and to connections
between aesthetic experience and educational experience. Both aesthetic
and learning experiences entail a process of discovery leading to heightened
personal powers or growing insight. Remembering that the term technology
originated from the Greek term "techne", meaning craft or art,
helps contribute to a contemporary perspective of educational technology
as a dialogue between the skills of humanity and the tools of technology.
This dialogue can take many directions which will greatly affect the learner.
In moving the focus from specific to general, how meanings were made in
this classroom might provide us with clearer lenses for looking at other
classrooms and computer labs. These stories of girls' experiences will
prove useful in helping to guide fair classroom practices and in helping
to determine software design.
Bibliography
Allen, Pat B. (1995). Art is a Way of Knowing. Boston: Shambhala.
Arnheim, Rudolf. (1969). Visual Thinking. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Arnstine, Donald. (1970). Aesthetic Qualities in Experience and Learning.
In R. Smith (Ed.). Aesthetic Concepts and Education. Chicago: University
of Illinois Press.
Beardsley, Monroe C. (1970). Aesthetic Theory and Educational Theory. In
R. Smith (Ed.). Aesthetic Concepts and Education.( pp. 3-20). Chicago,
Ill: University of Ill Press.
Beardsley, Monroe C. (1970). The Aesthetic Point of View. In H. E. Kiefer
and M.K. Munitz (Eds.). Perspectives in Education, Religion, and the
Arts. New York: State University of New York Press.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M.
(1986). Women's Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice and
Mind. MA: Basic Books...
Brown, Lyn Mikel & Gilligan, Carol. (1992). Meeting at the Crossroads:
Women's Psychology and Girls' Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Chandler, Daniel. (1992). The Purpose of the Computer in the Classroom.
In J. Beynon & H. Mackay. (Eds.). Technological Literacy and the
Curriculum. New York: Falmer Press.
Dewey, John. (1934). Art as Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Dorn, Charles M. (1994). Thinking in Art: A Philosophical Approach to
Art Education. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Eisner, Elliot. (1976). The Arts, Human Development and Education.
Berkeley, CA: McCutchen Publishing Co.
Eisner, Elliot. (1995). What Artistically Crafted Research Can Help Us
Understand About Schools. Educational Theory. Vol. 45 No. 1 Winter,
1-6.
Enciso (Edmiston), P. (1990). The nature of engagement in reading: Profiles
of three fifth graders' engagement strategies and stances. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University. Order Number 9111696.
Ernst, Karen. (1994). Picturing Learning: Artists and writers in the
classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gallas, K. (1992). Arts as Epistemology. In Arts as Education. Goldberg,
W.& Phillips, A. (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.
Gigliotti, Carol A. (1993). Aesthetics of a Virtual World: Ethical Issues
in Interactive Technological Design. Dissertation Abstracts International,
G53.(University Microfilms No. UMI #94-01266).
Gilligan, Carol, Lyons, Nona, & Hanmer, Trudy (Eds.).(1990). Making
Connections: The Relational Worlds of Adolescent Girls at Emma Willard
School. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gowan, J. C. (1978, Spring). Incubation, Imagery and Creativity. Journal
of Mental Imagery 2. 26.
Greene, Maxine. (1970). Teaching For Aesthetic Experience. Toward an
Aesthetic Education. Music Educator's National Conference. Central
Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc.
Greene, Maxine. (1978). Landscapes of Learning. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Greene, Maxine. (1985). Microcomputers: A View from Philosophy and the
Arts. In Humanistic Perspectives on Computers in the Schools. Harlow,
Steve. (Ed.). New York: Haworth Press.
Greene, Maxine. (1986). The Spaces of Aesthetic Education. Journal of
Aesthetic Education, Vol 20, No 4, University of Illinois, Winter.
Greene, Maxine. (1992). Texts and Margins. In Arts as Education.
Goldberg, Merryl Ruth & Phillips, Ann. (Eds.). MA: Harvard Educational
Review.
Griffin, B.L., Gillis, M.R., and Brown, M. (1986). The Counselor as a Computer
Consultant: Understanding Children's Attitudes Towards Computers. Elementary
School Guidance and Counseling 20 (4). 246 - 249.
Harney, Maurita. (1993). Computation and Gender In Technology and Feminism.
Rothschild, J. (Ed.). Connecticut: JAI Press.
Hawkins, Jan. (1987). Computers and Girls: Rethinking the Issues. In Pea,
Roy D., & Scheingold, Karen. (Eds.).Mirrors of Minds: Patterns of
Experience in Educational Computing. (pp. 242- 257). New Jersey: Ablex
Publishing.
Howard, V. A. (1992). Learning By All Means: Lessons from the Arts.
New York: Peter Lang.
Jansen, Sue C. (1989). Gender and the Information Society: A Socially Structured
Silence. in Siefert, M., Gerbner, G. & Fisher, J. (Eds.). The Information
Gap. (pp. 196-215). New York: Oxford University Press.
Klein, Elisa.(1985). Children and Computers. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Koestler, Arthur.(1964). The Act of Creation. New York: Macmillan.
176.
Kramarie, Cheris. (1988). Technology and Women's Voices: Keeping in
Touch. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Krendl, Kathy, Broihier, Mary, & Fleetwood, Cynthia. (1989). Children
and Computers: Do Sex-Related Differences Persist? In Siefert, Marsha,
Gerbner, George, and Fisher, Janice (Eds.), The Information Gap.(pp.
85 - 93). New York: Oxford University Press.
Laurel, Brenda. (1991). Computers as Theater. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Linn, M. (1985) Gender Equity in Computer Learning Environments. Computers
and the Social Sciences 1 (1) 19-27.
Loyd, B.H., Loyd, D.E., and Gressard, C.P. (1986) Computer Attitudes:
Differing Perspectives by Gender and the Amount of Computer Experience.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Francisco.
McCorduck, Pamela. (1992). How We Knew, How We Know, How We Will Know .
Literacy On-line. Tuman, Myron. (Ed.). Pittsburgh, PA: University
of Pittsburgh Press.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1967). Phenomenology of Perception. New York:
Humanities Press.
Noddings, Nel. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral
education. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Orenstein, Peggy. (1994). Schoolgirls. New York: Doubleday.
Pagano, Jo Anne. (1990). Exiles and Communities: Teaching in the Patriarchal
Wilderness. New York: State University of New York Press.
Rothschild, Joan. (Ed.). (1983). Machina Ex Dea: Feminist Perspectives
on Technology. New York: Pergamon Press.
Rothschild, Joan. (1988). Teaching Technology from a Feminist Perspective.
New York: Pergamon Press.
Sanders, Jo Shuchat & Stone, Antonia. (1986). The Neuter Computer:
Computers for Girls and Boys. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Sadker, Myra & David. (1994). Failing at Fairness. New York:
Macmillan.
Sheingold, Karen. (1987). The Microcomputer as a Symbolic Medium. In Roy
Pea & Karen Sheingold. (Eds.). Mirrors of Minds: Patterns of Experience
in Educational Computing. (pp. 198- 210). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Siefert, Marsha, Gerbner, George, & Fisher, Janice. (Eds.). (1989).
The Information Gap: How Computers and Other New Communication Technologies
Affect the Social Distribution of Power. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Streibel, Michael. (1985). Beyond Computer Literacy: Analytical skills,
inquiry skills, and personal empowerment. Technical Horizons in Education,
12 (10), 69-73.
Smith, C. M. (1971). John Dewey's Aesthetics and Aesthetic Education. In
Educational Theory, Vol. 21. Spring.
Spain, Daphne. (1992). Gendered Spaces. Chapel Hill, NC: University
of North Carolina Press.
Swann, Joan. (1992). Girls, Boys & Language. Cambridge,
MA: Blackwell.
Turkle, Sherry and Papert, Seymour. (1990). Epistemological Pluralism:
Styles and Voices within the Computer Culture. In Signs: Journal of
Women in Culture and Society. Vol. 16, No.1.
Whitman, Walt. (1959, 1st Edition 1855). Leaves of Grass. Malcolm
Cowley.(Ed.). New York: Viking Press.
Witherell, Carol and Noddings, Nel. (1991). Stories Lives Tell: Narrative
and Dialogue in Education. New York: Teachers College Press.