Buradasınız

An Ethnographic Approach to Gender-Based Relationships in Graphic Design Group Work

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Abstract (2. Language): 
Nowadays, the university pedagogy has increasingly used group work to help students increase their group work skills by gaining social recognitions while working with others. The factors investigated in this study may predict the different gender based roles among students’ relationships, especially the female students’ roles during group work in university. In this subject, there are questionnaire and target group investigations carried out by the graphic design students and designers, which compares the different group work experiences between their education lives and career lives. The study uses the quantitative and qualitative data using an ethnographic approach to suggest that the roles women take during the group work of their school lives will inevitably influence their future work positions. These findings about different positions associated with gender differences will help the educators identify the potential problems in groups, and furthermore will help female designers to improve their ability and competitiveness during group work.
1
14

REFERENCES

References: 

Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (1993). Women in management; organizational socialization and
assessment practices that prevent career advancement. International Journal of
Selection and Assessment, 1(2), 68-83.
Bass, B. M. & Dunteman, G. (1993). Women in management; organizational socialization
and assessment practices that prevent career advancement. International Journal of
Selection and Assessment, 1(2), 68-83.
Blake, R.R.& Mouton, J.S. (1978). The new managerial grid.Houston: Gulf.
Beardon, A.F. (2009-10). Creative Mathematics: A Gateway to Research. Cambridge
University Press.
Boereen, E. (2010-12). Gender differences in formal, non-formal and informal adult
learning Research Institution for Work and Society.
Chatman, J.A. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in
public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459-489.
Duehr, E. E., & Bono, J. E. (2006). Men, women, and managers: Are stereotypes finally
changing. Personnel Psychology, 59, 815-846.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gallagher, Margaret, (1995). Women and Media Decision-Making: The Invisible
Barriers.UNESCO Publishing, Paris.
Fleishman, E.A. &Salter, J.A. (1963). Relation between the leader’s behaviour and his
empathy towards subordinates. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 7, 79-84.
Gupta,V., Turban, D., Wasti, A. &Sikdar, A. (2009 forthcoming). The role of gender
stereotypes in perceptions of entrepreneurs and intentions to become an
entrepreneur. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 5, 269-298.
Johnson, P. (1976). Women and power; towards a theory of effectiveness. Journal of Social
Issues, 32 (3), 99-110.
Online Journal of Art and Design
volume 2, issue 3, 2014
14
Miller, L., &Budd, J. (1999). The development of occupational sex-role stereotypes,
occupational preferences and academic subject preferences in children at ages 8, 12
and 16. Educational Psychology, 19, 17-35.
Nancy Frey, Douglas Fisher, Sandi Everlove, (2009). Productive Group Work: How to
Engage Students, Build Teamwork, and Promote Understanding.Association for
Supervision & Curriculum Dev
Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math=male, me=female, therefore
math≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44-59.
Schein, V. E., Mueller, R. (1992). Sex role stereotyping and requisite management
characteristics: A cross cultural look. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13,
439-447.
West, C., &Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125-151.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com