Adolescents' motivation to select an academic science-related career: the role of school factors, individual interest, and science self-concept

Educational Research and Evaluation

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 717-733

  Taskinen, Päivi H ^a   Schütte, Kerstin ^b   Prenzel, Manfred ^c  

^a FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION   (Germany)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

career choice; Germany; science; secondary school; STEM careers

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887081756     PISSN: 13803611     EISSN: 17444187     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2013.853620     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Alexander, J. M., Johnson, K. E., & Kelley, K. (2012). Longitudinal analysis of the relations between opportunities to learn about science and the development of interests related to science. Science Education, 96, 763-786. doi: 10.1002/sce.21018
2. Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5, 243-260. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001
3. Belfi, B., Goos, M., De Fraine, B., & Van Damme, J. (2012). The effect of class composition by gender and ability on secondary school students' school well-being and academic self-concept: A literature review. Educational Research Review, 7, 62-74. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.09.002
4. Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265
5. Buccheri, G., Abt Gürber, N., & Brühwiler, C. (2011). The impact of gender on interest in science topics and the choice of scientific and technical vocations. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 159-178. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.518643
6. Cheryan, S., Siy, J. O., Vichayapai, M., Drury, B. J., & Kim, S. (2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women's anticipated success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 656-664. doi: 10.1177/1948550611405218
7. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
8. Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105-121). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
9. Eurydice. (2006). Science teaching in schools in Europe. Policies and research. Brussels, Belgium: Author.
10. Fouad, N. A., Hackett, G., Smith, P. L., Kantamneni, N., Fitzpatrick, M., Haag, S., & Spencer, D. (2010). Barriers and supports for continuing in mathematics and science: Gender and educational level differences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 361-373. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2010.06.004
11. Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1999). Long-term consequences of curriculum choices with particular reference to mathematics and science. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10, 217-232. doi: 10.1076/sesi.10.2.217.3509
12. George, R., & Kaplan, D. (1998). A structural model of parent and teacher influences on science attitudes of eighth graders: Evidence from NELS: 88. Science Education, 82, 93-109. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199801)82:1<93::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-W
13. Hannover, B., & Kessels, U. (2004). Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic choices. Why high school students do not like math and science. Learning and Instruction, 14, 51-67.
14. Häussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2002). An intervention study to enhance girls' interest, self-concept, and achievement in physics classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 870-888. doi: 10.1002/tea.10048
15. Herr, E. L., Cramer, S. H., & Niles, S. G. (2004). Career guidance and counseling through the lifespan: Systematic approaches (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
16. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
17. Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
18. Jacobs, J. E., & Simpkins, S. D. (2006). Leaks in the pipeline to math, science, and technology careers. New York, NY: Wiley.
19. Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84, 180-192. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200003)84:2<180::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-X
20. Kerger, S., Martin, R., & Brunner, M. (2011). How can we enhance girls' interest in scientific topics? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 606-628. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02019.x
21. King, H., & Glackin, M. (2010). Supporting science learning in out-of-school contexts. In J. Osborne & J. Dillon (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (2nd ed., pp. 259-273). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
22. Kobarg, M., Prenzel, M., Seidel, T., Walker, M., McCrae, B., Cresswell, J., & Wittwer, J. (2011). An international comparison of science teaching and learning. Further results from PISA 2006. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
23. Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (2001). Does interest matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 448-470. doi: 10.2307/749801
24. Korpershoek, H., Kuyper, H., Bosker, R., & Van der Werf, G. (2013). Students' preconceptions and perceptions of science-related studies. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 2356-2375. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.679324
25. Kracke, B. (2002). The role of personality, parents and peers in adolescents career exploration. Journal of Adolescence, 25, 19-30. doi: 10.1006/jado.2001.0446
26. Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 27-50. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.518645
27. Lavonen, J., Byman, R., Uitto, A., Juuti, K., & Meisalo, V. (2008). Students' interest and experiences in physics and chemistry related themes: Reflections based on a ROSE-survey in Finland. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 1, 7-36.
28. Levesque, C., Copeland, K. J., Pattie, M. D., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 618-623). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
29. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31, 313-327.
30. Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education, 95, 877-907.
31. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., Muthén, B., & Nagengast, B. (2009). Doubly-latent models of school contextual effects: Integrating multilevel and structural equation approaches to control measurement and sampling error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 764-802. doi: 10.1080/00273170903333665
32. Marsh, H. W., & Martin, A. J. (2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 59-77. doi: 10.1348/000709910X503501
33. Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1997). Coursework selection: Relations to academic self-concept and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 691-720. doi: 10.3102/00028312034004691
34. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction - what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 474-496. doi: 10.1002/tea.20347
35. Möller, J., Pohlmann, B., Köller, O., & Marsh, H. W. (2009). A meta-analytic path analysis of the internal/external frame of reference model of academic achievement and academic self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1129-1167. doi: 10.3102/0034654309337522
36. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user's guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Authors.
37. Nagengast, B., & Marsh, H. W. (2012). Big fish in little ponds aspire more: Mediation and cross-cultural generalizability of school-average ability effects on self-concept and career aspirations in science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 1033-1053. doi: 10.1037/a0027697
38. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow's world. Paris, France: Author.
39. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2008). Encouraging student interest in science and technology studies. Paris, France: Author.
40. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). PISA 2006. Technical report. Paris, France: Author.
41. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079. doi: 10.1080/0950069032000032199
42. Painter, J., Jones, M. G., Tretter, T. R., & Kubasko, D. (2006). Pulling back the curtain: Uncovering and changing students' perceptions of scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 181-190. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18074.x doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18074.x
43. Pang, J., & Good, R. (2000). A review of the integration of science and mathematics: Implications for further research. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 73-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2000.tb17239.x
44. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and learning contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667-686. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
45. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46. Reis, S. M., & Park, S. (2001). Gender differences in high-achieving students in math and science. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 52-73.
47. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
48. Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2007). Science education and youth's identity construction - two incompatible projects? In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The re-emergence of values in science education (pp. 231-247). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
49. Seidel, T., Prenzel, M., Rimmele, R., Herweg, C., Kobarg, M., Schwindt, K., & Dalehefte, I. M. (2007). Science teaching and learning in German physics classrooms: Findings from the IPN video study. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools: The final Report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp. 79-99). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
50. Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2010). Students' attitudes to science. In J. Osborne & J. Dillon (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (2nd ed., pp. 238-258). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
51. Sjaastad, J. (2012). Sources of inspiration: The role of significant persons in young people's choice of science in higher education. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 1615-1636. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.590543
52. Staff, J., Messersmith, E. E., & Steinberg, L. (2009). Adolescents in the world of work. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 270-313). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
53. Stake, J. E., & Nikens, S. D. (2005). Adolescent girls' and boys' science peer relationships and perceptions of the possible self as scientist. Sex Roles, 52, 1-11. doi: 10.1007/s11199-005-1189-4
54. Su, R., Rounds, J., & Armstrong, P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 859-884. doi: 10.1037/a0017364
55. Super, D. E., Savickas, M. L., & Super, C. M. (1996). The life-span, life-space approach to careers. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (pp. 121-178). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
56. Swarat, S., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W. (2012). Activity matters: Understanding student interest in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 515-537. doi: 10.1002/tea.21010
57. Tran, N. A. (2011). The relationship between students' connections to out-of-school experiences and factors associated with science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1625-1651. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.516030
58. Van Eijck, M., & Roth, W.-M. (2008). Representations of scientists in Canadian high school and college textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1059-1082. doi: 10.1002/tea.20259
59. Warm, T. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427-450. doi: 10.1007/BF02294627
60. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
61. Wilson, C. D., Taylor, J. A., Kowalski, S. M., & Carlson, J. (2010). The relative effects and equity of inquiry-based and commonplace science teaching on students' knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 276-301.
62. Wittwer, J. (2008). What influences the agreement among student ratings of science instruction? Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft (Sonderheft 10), 205-220.
63. Wölfel, O., & Heineck, G. (2012). Parental risk attitudes and children's secondary school track choice. Economics of Education Review, 31, 727-743. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2012.05.004
64. Zeldin, A. L., Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). A comperative study of the self-efficacy beliefs of successful men and women in mathematics, science and technology careers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1036-1058. doi: 10.1002/tea.20195