ArticleF1000Research2025
Gender and Narrative Writing in Elementary Schools: A Qualitative Study Supporting Inclusive Education.
Article in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gender and Narrative Writing in Elementary Schools: A Qualitative Study Supporting Inclusive Education.F1000Research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study investigates gender differences in narrative writing among primary school students to promote inclusive education, as narrative writing reflects embedded gender norms that influence literacy development and classroom equity. By examining these differences, this study aims to highlight how gender stereotypes can marginalize certain narrative styles and inform pedagogical strategies for Indonesian schools. Methods: This qualitative case study with quantitative analysis examined 33 handwritten narratives from fifth-grade students (12 boys, 21 girls) and interviews with 10 students. SES data were collected through a parent questionnaire covering education, occupation, and home literacy environment. Two blind raters evaluated the narratives, with moderate inter-rater reliability (Cohen's κ = 0.434). Thematic analysis was supplemented with t-tests and Pearson correlations to examine gender differences and the relationship between SES and narrative quality. Results: The results showed that female students excelled notably in organization (mean score 18,4 vs. 15,1 for males), grammar (9,95 vs. 8,15), and writing conventions (2,7 vs. 2,2), indicating greater coherence, grammatical accuracy, and technical precision in their narratives. In contrast, male students scored slightly higher on content (26 vs. 25,3), driven by a marginally higher focus on characterization, though females led in plot complexity and setting detail. Language scores were comparable between genders. The overall final narrative score favored females (68,95 vs. 63,95). Correlation analysis revealed significant relationships between maternal education, home literacy environment, and narrative quality. Conclusions: Gender stereotypes shape literacy practices and may perpetuate educational inequalities. The study recommends gender-sensitive rubrics, cross-gender writing exercises, and teacher training to support inclusive education that validates diverse student voices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.