Tổng quan nghiên cứu về mối liên hệ giữa thiên kiến giới và thể hiện giới ở sinh viên sư phạm
Tóm tắt
This study employed a thematic integrative literature review to synthesise Vietnamese and international evidence on gender bias, gender expression, and the relationship between these two constructs among pre-service teachers. The literature search and updating process was conducted from December 2025 to June 2026. Following screening and classification, 22 publications were included in the synthesis, comprising 11 theoretical, conceptual, or review sources and 11 empirical studies or reports. The findings indicate that research on gender bias has predominantly focused on stereotypes, expectations, and evaluative judgements, whereas studies of gender expression have placed greater emphasis on the negotiation of masculinity, femininity, and professional identity. Bridging evidence suggests that gendered expectations and norms may shape how pre-service teachers regulate their professional demeanour, emotional expression, authority, caregiving practices, and professional self-presentation. However, no study was identified that directly examined gender bias and gender expression simultaneously within the same sample of pre-service teachers. Accordingly, the relationship between the two constructs is currently supported mainly by indirect evidence and remains insufficiently established to warrant causal conclusions. The review highlights the need for clearer conceptual boundaries, contextually appropriate measurement tools, and greater use of mixed-methods research in Vietnamese teacher education.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
American Psychological Association (2015). Guidelines for psychological practice with transgender and gender nonconforming people. American Psychologist, 70(9), 832-864. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039906
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354-364. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354
Bùi, T. L., Phan, Y. N., Sùng, T. N., & Cứ, T. P. (2024). Current status of gender prejudice of teachers at some preschools in Hanoi City. HNUE Journal of Science: Educational Sciences, 69(4A), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.18173/2354-1075.2024-0078
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203824979
Denessen, E., Hornstra, L., van den Bergh, L., & Bijlstra, G. (2022). Implicit measures of teachers’ attitudes and stereotypes, and their effects on teacher practice and student outcomes: A review. Learning and Instruction, 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101437
Doornkamp, L., Van der Pol, L. D., Groeneveld, S., Mesman, J., Endendijk, J. J., & Groeneveld, M. G. (2022). Understanding gender bias in teachers’ grading: The role of gender stereotypical beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103826
Fink, K., Weiß, H., McGuire, L., Mulvey, K. L., & Beißert, H. (2025). Teachers’ and pre-service teachers’ (stereotypical) expectations regarding children’s competencies in different STEM fields. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 28(5), 1103-1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-025-01352-w
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
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
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(4), 691-715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9593-z
Hoang Yen, N., Xuan, B., Mai Ha, N., Diep, B., Chien, N., Long, N., … Jones, T. (2016). Reaching out: Preventing and addressing SOGIE-related school violence in Viet Nam. UNESCO, Paris; Ha Noi; Bangkok. https://doi.org/10.54675/XICP3981
Hong, Q. N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., … Pluye, P. (2018). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285-291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221
Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., … Vedel, I. (2019). Improving the content validity of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool: A modified e-Delphi study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 111, 49-59.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.008
Mai Thi Thuy Dung, & Brundrett, M. (2021). The efficacy of the SECI model for the training of high school teachers in relation to gender equality in Vietnam. VNU Journal of Science: Education Research, 37(4), 10-18. https://doi.org/10.25073/2588-1159/vnuer.4530
Miralles-Cardona, C. (2025). Teaching gender equality in teacher education: Does existing practice actually support gender mainstreaming implementation? Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1570115
Moosa, S., & Bhana, D. (2023). Men who teach early childhood education: Mediating masculinity, authority and sexuality. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103959
Nguyen, T. B. P., & Pham, K. L. (2025). The teacher within: Shaping preservice teacher identity through private tutoring. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 41(1S), 135-151. https://doi.org/10.63023/2525-2445/jfs.ulis.5427
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pearse, R. (2017). Gender bias. In F. M. Moghaddam, & F. M. Moghaddam (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Political Behavior (1 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 319-322). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483391144.n147
Phan, A. N., & Pham, T. X. (2021). Gender stereotypes as hidden curriculum: A case of Vietnamese English textbooks. International Journal of Education, 14(1), 30-38. https://doi.org/10.17509/ije.v14i1.30553
Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199755776.001.0001
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404-428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1(2), 125-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243287001002002
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546-553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Xu, H. (2025). From male pre-service teachers to pre-service male teachers: Constructing masculinity in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 160, Article 105036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025.105036
Zhang, Y. E., & Darvin, R. (2025). Negotiating gender ideologies and investing in teacher identities: The motivation and investment of EFL pre-service teachers. System, 133, Article 103669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103669
Đã Xuất bản
Cách trích dẫn
Số
Chuyên mục
Giấy phép
Bản quyền (c) 2026 Tạp chí Giáo dục
Tác phẩm này được cấp phép theo Ghi nhận tác giả của Creative Commons Giấy phép quốc tế 4.0 .









