Young Women's Science/Mathematics Career Goals From Seventh Grade to High School Graduation

Journal of Educational Research

Volumn 97, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 248-268

  VanLeuvan, Patricia ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Mathematics and science based careers; Surveys completed in Grades 7 and 12; Young women's educational and career goals

Indexed keywords

EID: 2442612788     PISSN: 00220671     EISSN: 19400675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/JOER.97.5.248-268     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Adelman, C. (1991). Women at thirtysomething: Paradoxes of attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Development.
2. American Association of University Women. (1992). How schools short-change girls. Washington, DC: Author.
3. Arnold, K. D. (1993). Undergraduate aspirations and career outcomes of academically-talented women: A discriminant analysis. Roeper Review, 15, 169-175.
4. Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (1993). Undergraduate science education: The impact of different college environments on the educational pipeline in the sciences. Final Report to the National Science Foundation (Grant No. SPA-8955365). Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute.
5. Astin, H. S., & Sax, L. J. (1996). Developing scientific talent in undergraduate women. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 96-121). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Bandura, A. (1997). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-tice-Hall.
7. Beane, D. B. (1985). Mathematics and science: Critical filters for the future of minority students. Washington, DC: American University, Mid-Atlantic Center for Race Equity.
8. Benbow, C. P., & Minor, L. L. (1986). Mathematically talented males and females and achievement in the high school sciences. American Educa-tional Research Journal, 23, 425-436.
9. Betz, N. E. (1994). Career counseling for women in the sciences and engi-neering. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career counseling for women (pp. 237-262). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Bunderson, E. D., & Baird, J. H. (1994). Teachers’ perceptions of topics selected by boys and girls for science fair projects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, CA.
11. Burlew, A. K., & Johnson, J. L. (1992). Role conflict and career advancement among African American women in nontraditional professions. The Career Development Quarterly, 40, 302-312.
12. Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1987). Adolescent self-concept: Testing the assumption of equivalent structure across gender. American Educational Research Journal, 24(3), 365-385.
13. Byrne, E. M. (1993). Women and science: The snark syndrome. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
14. Casserly, P. L. (1980). Factors affecting female participation in advanced placement programs in mathematics, chemistry, and physics. In L. Fox, L. Brody, & D. Tobin (Eds.), Women and the mathematical mystique (pp. 138-163). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
15. Catsambis, S. (1995). Gender, race, ethnicity, and science education in the middle grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 243-257.
16. Clewell, B. C., Anderson, B. T., & Thorpe, M. E. (1992). Breaking the bar-riers: Helping female and minority students succeed in mathematics and science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. The College Board. (2002). College-bound seniors, national and state reports. Retrieved June 1, 2002, from the College Board Web site: http://www.collegeboard.com/sat/cbsenior/yr2000/nat/cbs2000.html
18. Davis, B. G., & Humphreys, S. (1985). Evaluating intervention programs: Applications for women’s programs in math and science. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
19. Davis, C. S., & Rosser, S. V. (1996). Program and curricular interventions. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 232-264). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20. Dix, L. S. (Ed.). (1994). Women scientists and engineers employed in industry: Why so few? Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
21. Eccles, J. S., Barber, B., & Jozefowicz, D. (1998). Linking gender to edu-cational, occupational, and recreational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In W. B. Swann, Jr., J. H. Lan-glois, & L. A. Gilbert (Eds.), Sexism and stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Spence (pp. 153-192). Washington, DC: APA Press.
22. Eccles, J. S., & Jacobs, J. E. (1986). Social forces shape math attitudes and performance. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11(2), 367-380.
23. Educational Testing Service. (1999). College bound seniors: Profiles of SAT and achievement test takers. Retrieved June 22, 2000, from: http://www.neh.fed.us/datasets/sat_ach.html
24. Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261-296.
25. Fennema, E. (1981). The sex factor. In E. Fennema (Ed.), Mathematics education research: Implications for the 80’s (pp. 92-110). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
26. Grieb, H., & Easley, J. (1984). A primary school impediment to mathe-matical equity: Case studies in rule-dependent socialization. In M. Steinkamp & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Women in science (pp. 317-362). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
27. Guzzetti, B., & Williams, W. (1996). Gender, text, and discussion: Exam-ining intellectual safety in the science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 5-20.
28. Hanson, K. (1992). Teaching mathematics effectively and equitably to females. Trends and Issues No. 17. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED348365)
29. Hanson, S. L. (1996). Lost talent: Women in the sciences. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
30. Hill, O. W., Pettus, W. C., & Hedin, B. A. (1990). Three studies of factors affecting the attitudes of blacks and females toward the pursuit of science and science-related careers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 289-314.
31. Hilton, T., & Berglund, J. (1974). Sex differences and mathematics achievement: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Educational Research, 67, 231-237.
32. Hofstein, A. (1990, January). Attitudes toward school science: Comparison of participation and nonparticipation in extracurricular science activities. School Science and Mathematics, 90(1), 13-22.
33. Holland, D. C., & Eisenhart, M. A. (1990). Educated in romance: Women, achievement, and college culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., Ryan, M., Frost, L., & Hopp, C. (1990). Gender comparisons of mathematics attitudes and affect. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 299-324.
35. Hyde, J. S., & Jaffe, S. (1998). Perspectives from social and feminist psy-chology. Educational Researcher, 27(5), 14-16.
36. Hynes, P. (1995). No classroom is an island. In S. V. Rosser (Ed.), Teaching the majority (pp. 211-219). New York: Teachers College Press.
37. Ianni, F. A. (1989). The search for structure: A report of American youth today. New York: Free Press.
38. Jacobs, J. E., Finken, L. L., Griffen, N. L., & Wright, J. D. (1998). The career plans of science-talented rural adolescent girls. American Educational Research Journal, 35(4), 681-704.
39. Jones, L. R., Mullis, I. V. S., Raizen, S. A., Weiss, I. R., & Weston, E. A. (1992). The 1990 science report card: NAEP’s assessment of fourth, eighth and twelfth graders. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
40. Jones, M. G., & Wheatley, J. (1990). Gender differences in teacher-student interactions in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(9), 861-874.
41. Kahle, J. B. (1985). Retention of girls in science: Case studies of secondary teachers. In Kahle (Ed.), Women in science: A report from the field (pp. 49-76). Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
42. Kahle, J. B. (1996). Opportunities and obstacles: Science education in the schools. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 57-95). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
43. Kahle, J. B., & Damnjanovic, A. (1994). The effect of inquiry activities on elementary students’ enjoyment, ease, and confidence in doing science: An analysis by sex and race. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 1, 17-28.
44. Kahle, J. B., & Meece, J. L. (1994). Girls and science education: A devel-opmental model. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research in science teaching and learning (pp. 1559-1610). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers’ Association.
45. Kahle, J. B., Parker, L. H., Rennie, L. J., & Riley, D. (1993). Gender dif-ferences in science education: Building a model. Educational Psychologist, 28, 379-404.
46. Kahle, J. B., & Rennie, L. J. (1993). Ameliorating gender differences in attitudes about science: A cross-national study. Journal of Science Edu-cation and Technology, 2(1), 321-334.
47. Kimball, M. M. (1989). A new perspective on women’s math achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 198-214.
48. Leder, G. C. (1990). Teacher/student interactions in the mathematics class-room: A different perspective. In E. Fennema & G. C. Leder (Eds.), Math-ematics and gender (pp. 10-26). New York: Teacher’s College Press.
49. Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1991). Mathematics self-efficacy: Sources and relation to science-based career choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 424-430.
50. Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G. & Bieschke, K. J. (1993). Predicting mathematics-related choice and success behaviors: Test of an expanded social cognitive model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 223-236.
51. Linn, M. C., & Hyde, J. S. (1989). Gender, mathematics, and science. Edu-cational Researcher, 18, 17-27.
52. Lips, H. M. (1992). Gender-and sex-related attitudes as predictors of college students’ academic choices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 40, 62-81.
53. Livingston, M. M., & Burley, K. A. (1991). Surprising initial findings regarding sex, sex roles, and anticipated work-family conflict. Psychological Reports, 68, 735-738.
54. Malcom, S. M. (1990). Reclaiming our past. The Journal of Negro Educa-tion, 59(3), 246-259.
55. Marini, M. M. (1984). Women’s educational attainment and the timing of entry into parenthood. American Psychological Review, 49(4), 491-511.
56. Marsh, H. W., Parker, J., & Barnes, J. (1985). Multidimensional adolescent self-concepts: Their relationship to age, sex, and academic measures. American Educational Research Journal, 22(3), 422-444.
57. McCracken, R. S., & Weitzman, L. M. (1997). Relationship of personal agency, problem-solving appraisal, and traditionality of career choice to women’s attitudes toward multiple role planning. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(2), 149-159.
58. Meece, J. L., & Jones, M. G. (1996). Gender differences in motivation and strategy use in science: Are girls rote learners? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(4), 393-406.
59. Meece, J. L., Parsons, J. E., Kaczala, C. M., Goff, S. B., & Futterman, R. (1982). Sex differences in math achievement: Toward a model of academic choice. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 324-348.
60. Meyer, M. R., & Koehler, M. S. (1990). Internal influences on gender differences in mathematics. In E. Fennema & G. Leder (Eds.), Mathematics and gender (pp. 60-95). New York: Teachers College Press.
61. Miller, A., & Silver, C. B. (1992). The limits of intervention: Lessons from Eureka, a program to retain students in science and mathematics-related majors. Initiatives, 55(2), 21-29.
62. Mills, J. (1993). Shedding chemistry’s uncool image. Science, 260, 413.
63. Morgan, C. S. (1992). College students’ perceptions of barriers to women in science and engineering. Youth and Society, 24(2), 228-236.
64. Mullis, I. V. S., & Jenkins, L. B. (1988). The science report card: Elements of risk and recovery. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
65. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). The conditions of education 1997: Women in mathematics and science (NCES 97-982). Washington, DC: Author.
66. National Science Board. (1998). Science and engineering indicators-1998. (NSB 98-1). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
67. National Science Foundation. (1996). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1996 (NSF No. 96-311). Arlington, VA: Author.
68. Nauta, M. M., Epperson, D. L., & Kahn J. H. (1998). A multi-group analysis of predictors of higher level career aspirations among women in mathematics, science, and engineering majors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45(4), 483-496.
69. Oakes, J. (1990). Lost talent: The under-representation of women, minorities, and disabled persons in science. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
70. Packard, B. W. (2002). Women who continue to pursue science: Motivated not only despite but also by concerns about the future. Advancing Women in Leadership, 10(11).
71. Rayman, P. M., & Jackson, J. S. (1996). Women scientists in industry. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 290-319). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
72. Rosser, S. V. (1990). Female friendly science. New York: Penguin Press.
73. Rosser, S. V. (1993). Female friendly science: Including women in the cur-riculum content and pedagogy in science. The Journal of General Edu-cation, 42(3), 191-220.
74. Sadker, D., & Sadker, M. (1986). Sexism in the classroom: From grade school to graduate school. Phi Delta Kappan, 512-515.
75. Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at fairness: How America's schools cheat girls. Charles Scribner Sons.
76. Sax, L. J. (1994a). Mathematical self-concept: How college reinforces the gender gap. Research in Higher Education, 35, 141-166.
77. Sax, L. J. (1994b). Retaining tomorrow’s scientists: Exploring the factors that keep male and female college students interested in science careers. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 1(1), 45-62.
78. Sax, L. J. (1995). Predicting gender and major-field differences in mathe-matical self-concept during college. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 1(4), 291-307.
79. Schuck, J. A. (1998). Factors contributing to the under-representation of women in physics-based engineering fields: Final report to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
80. Seymour, E. (1995, July). The loss of women from science, mathematics and engineering undergraduate majors: An explanatory account. Science Education, 79, 437-473.
81. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergrad-uates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
82. Shakeshaft, C. (1995). Reforming science education to include girls. Theory into Practice, 34(1), 74-79.
83. Shepardson, D. P. & Pizzini, E. L. (1992). Gender bias in female elementary teachers’ perceptions of the science ability of students. Science Education, 76(2), 147-153.
84. Smith, W. S., & Erb, T. O. (1986). Effect of women science career role models on early adolescents’ attitudes toward scientists and women in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 667-676.
85. Stage, F. K., & Maple, S. A. (1996). Incompatible goals: Narratives of graduate women in the mathematics pipeline. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 23-51.
86. Stipek, D. J., & Gralinski, J. H. (1991). Gender differences in children’s achievement-related beliefs and emotional responses to success and failure in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 361-371.
87. Taber, K. (1992). Science-relatedness and gender appropriateness of careers: Some pupil perceptions. Research in Science and Technology Education, 10, 105-115.
88. Tobias, S. (1990). They’re not dumb, they’re different: Stalking the second tier. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation: A Foundation for the Advancement of Science.
89. Tsai, S. & Walberg, H. J. (1983). Mathematics achievement and attitude productivity in junior high school. The Journal of Educational Research, 76, 267-272.
90. VanLeuvan, P. (1999). Leveraging opportunities to mentor in mathematics and science. In C. J. Williams & F. Bonner (Eds.), Higher education in transition: The politics and practices of equity (pp. 255-268). Washington, DC: American Association of University Women and the AAUW Education Foundation.
91. VanLeuvan, P. (2001). Views of mathematics-and science-based careers expressed by young women in southeastern Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Educational Leadership, 21(1), 43-50.
92. VanLeuvan, P. (2002, April). Young women’s career aspirations in mathe-matics-and science-based fields from middle school to high school and beyond. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
93. Vetter, B. M. (1996). Myths and realities of women’s progress in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 29-56). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
94. Ware, N. C., & Lee, V. E. (1988). Sex difference in choice of college science majors. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 593-614.
95. Weinburgh, M. (1995). Gender differences in students’ attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 387-398.