Exploring Compensations for Demographic Disadvantage in Science Talent Development.
Journal
New directions for child and adolescent development
ISSN: 1534-8687
Titre abrégé: New Dir Child Adolesc Dev
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100886823
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2019
Nov 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
9
11
2019
medline:
9
11
2019
entrez:
9
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study explores factors enhancing the likelihood that three demographically disadvantaged groups of selective science high school graduates would complete a university STEM degree 4-6 years later. The target groups are labeled as disadvantaged in terms of STEM pipeline persistence compared to school peers, and include: (1) women, (2) those without a parent in a STEM field, and (3) those whose parents were not educated beyond high school. Employing Social Cognitive Career Theory as a conceptual framework, we focus on two categories of factors. Individual factors incorporate motivation and career intention brought to the high school experience. Environmental factors include graduates' high school experiences related to their STEM interest and capacity development. The individual variables include: STEM career intentions prior to high school, motivation for attending a specialized science high school, and motivation for pursuing advanced science courses in high school. Environmental factors include whether participants partook in an authentic research experience, had a mentor, felt they belonged at the school, maintained their interest in STEM as well as perceived intellectual capacity for STEM throughout high school. The results have promising implications for educational policy associated with STEM talented students.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
101-130Informations de copyright
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Almarode, J. T., Subotnik, R. F., Crowe, E., Tai, R. H., Lee, G. M., & Nowlin, F. (2014). Specialized high schools and talent search programs: Incubators for adolescents with high ability in STEM disciplines. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25, 307-331.
Almarode, J. T., Subotnik, R. F., Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Lee, G. S. (2018). Perceptions of selective STEM high school graduates: Deep versus surface learning, college readiness, and persistence in STEM. Research in the Schools, 25, 72-84.
Anderhag, P., Wickman, P.-O., Bergqvist, K., Jakobson, B., Hamza, K. M., & Säljö, R. (2016). Why do secondary school students lose their interest in science? Or does it never emerge? A possible and overlooked explanation: Interest in science. Science Education, 100(5), 791-813. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21231
Bairaktarova, D., & Evangelou, D. (2012). Creativity and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in early childhood education. Contemporary Perspectives on Research in Creativity in Early Childhood Education, 377-396.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373.
Bloom, B. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballentine.
Bozick, R., & Ingels, S. J. (2008). Mathematics Coursetaking and Achievement at the End of High School: Evidence from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS: 2002). Statistical Analysis Report. NCES 2008-319. National Center for Education Statistics.
Chen, X. (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014-001). Statistical Analysis Report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014001rev.pdf
Chen, X., & Weko, T. (2009). Students who study science, technology, engineering & math in postsecondary education. Washington DC: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics, 161.
Dixson, D. D., Worrell, F. C., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Subotnik, R. F. (2016). Beyond perceived ability: The contribution of psychosocial factors to academic performance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1377, 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13210
Dou, R., Hazari, A., Dabney, K., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. (2019). Early informal STEM experiences and STEM identity: The importance of talking science. Science Education, 103, 623-637.
Fouad, N. A., & Santana, M. C. (2017). SCCT and underrepresented populations in STEM fields: Moving the needle. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(1), 24-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072716658324
Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women's representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychologyl, 102, 700-717.
Grauca, J. M., Ethington, C. A., & Pascarella, E. T. (1988). Intergenerational effects of college graduation on career sex atypicality in women. Research in Higher Education, 29(2), 99-124. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992281
Hambourger, L. H. (2004). Decision-making, gender and field of academic major choice. (Doctoral Dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Hoferichter, F., & Raufelder, D. (2019). Mothers and fathers-Who matters for STEM performance? Gender-specific associations between STEM performance, parental pressure, and support during adolescence. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00014
House, J. D. (2000). Academic background and self-beliefs as predictors of student grade performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27, 207-220.
Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 61, 505-532.
Kuncel, N. R., Credé, M., & Thomas, L. L. (2005). The validity of self-reported grade point averages, class ranks, and test scores: A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 63-82. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075001063
Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (2003). Dropping out of high school: The role of school organization and structure. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 353-393. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040002353
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79-122.
Logan, M., & Skamp, K. (2008). Engaging students in science across the primary secondary interface: Listening to the students’ voice. Research in Science Education, 38(4), 501-527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9063-8
MacPhee, D., Farro, S., & Canetto, S. S. (2013). Academic self-efficacy and performance of underrepresented STEM majors: Gender, ethnic, and social class patterns. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13, 347-369.
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among US students. Science Education, 95, 877-907.
Marsh, H. (2005). Big-fish-little-pond-effect on academic self-concept. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 19(3), 119-127.
Marshall, S. P., McGee, G. W. M., McLaren, E., & Veal, C. C. (2011). Discovering and developing diverse STEM talent: Enabling academically talented urban youth to flourish. Gifted Child Today, 34(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621751103400107
Mau, W.-C. J., & Li, J. (2018). Factors influencing STEM career aspirations of underrepresented high school students. Career Development Quarterly, 66(3), 246-258. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12146
Miller, J. D., & Kimmel, L. G. (2012). Pathways to a STEMM profession. Peabody Journal of Education, 87, 26-45.
Miller, J. D., & Pearson, Jr. W. (2012). Pathways to STEMM professions for students from noncollege homes. Peabody Journal of Education, 87, 114-132.
Moakler, M. W., & Kim, M. M. (2014). College major choice in STEM: Revisiting confidence and demographic factors. Career Development Quarterly, 62(2), 128-142. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2014.00075.x
Mullis, I. V., & Martin, M. O. (2017). TIMSS 2019 Assessment Frameworks. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Herengracht 487, Amsterdam, 1017 BT, The Netherlands.
National Science Board. (2010). Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators: Identifying and developing our nation's human capital. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Nugent, G., Barker, B., Welch, G., Grandgenett, N., Wu, C., & Nelson, C. (2015). A model of factors contributing to STEM learning and career orientation. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 1067-1088.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Subotnik, R. F., & Worrell, F. C. (2015). Conceptions of giftedness and the development of talent: Implications for counselors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 93, 143-152.
Paik, S. J., Choe, S. M. M., Otto, W. J., & Rahman, Z. (2018). Learning about the lives and early experiences of notable Asian American women: Productive giftedness, childhood traits, and supportive conditions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 41(2), 160-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353218763927
Pajares, F. (2002). Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 116-125. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_8
Pfund, C., Byars-Winston, A., Branchaw, J., Hurtado, S., & Eagan, K. (2016). Defining attributes and metrics of effective research mentoring relationships. AIDS and Behavior, 20, 238-248.
Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: A systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.881626
Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Wethersfield, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Schneider, B., Swanson, C. B., & Riegle-Crumb, C. (1997). Opportunities for learning: Course sequences and positional advantages. Social Psychology of Education, 2(1), 25-53. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009601517753
Simpkins, S. D., Davis-Kean, P. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Math and science motivation: A longitudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 42(1), 70-83. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.1.70
Simpkins, S. D., Price, C. D., & Garcia, K. (2015). Parental support and high school students’ motivation in biology, chemistry, and physics: Understanding differences among Latino and Caucasian boys and girls. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 1386-1407.
Staniec, J. F. O. (2004). The effects of race, sex, and expected returns on the choice of college major. Eastern Economic Journal, 30(4), 549-562. Retrieved from JSTOR.
Stanley, J. C. (1976). The case for extreme educational acceleration of intellectually brilliant youths. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20, 66-75.
Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Stoeger, H., Duan, X., Schirner, S., Greindl, T., & Ziegler, A. (2013). The effectiveness of a one-year online mentoring program for girls in STEM. Computers & Education, 69, 408-418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.032
Stoeger, H., Schirner, S., Laemmle, L., Obergriesser, S., Heilemann, M., & Ziegler, A. (2016). A contextual perspective on talented female participants and their development in extracurricular STEM programs. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1377, 53-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13116
Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women's self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 255-270. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021385
Subotnik, R. F., Almarode, J. T., & Lee, G. S. (2016). STEM schools as incubators of talent development. Gifted Child Today, 39, 236-241.
Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3-54.
Subotnik, R. F., Tai, R. H., & Almarode, J. T. (2011). Study of the impact of selective science high schools: Reflections on learners gifted and motivated in science and mathematics. Washington DC: National Research Council.
Subotnik, R. F., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., & Crowe, E. (2013). What are the value added contributions of selective secondary schools of mathematics, science, and technology to the preparation of scientists? Talent Development and Excellence, 5, 87-97.
Svoboda, R. C., Rozek, C. S., Hyde, J. S., Harackiewicz, J. M., & Destin, M. (2016). Understanding the relationship between parental education and STEM course taking through identity-based and expectancy-value theories of motivation. AERA Open, 2(3), 233285841666487. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416664875
Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning for early careers in science. Science, 312, 1143-1144.
Tannenbaum, A. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Tannenbaum, A. J. (1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 21-52). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, J., & Williams, C. (2010). The history of specialized STEM schools and the formation and role of the NCSSSMST. Roeper Review, 32, 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190903386561.
Tindall, T., & Hamil, B. (2003). Gender disparity in science education: The causes, consequences, and solution. Education, 125(2), 282-295.
Turner, S. L., Steward, J. C., & Lapan, R. T. (2004). Family factors associated with sixth-grade adolescents’ math and science career interests. Career Development Quarterly, 53(1), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2004.tb00654.x
Tyson, W., Lee, R., Borman, K. M., & Hanson, M. A. (2007). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pathways: High school science and math coursework and postsecondary degree attainment. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12(3), 243-270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824660701601266
Tytler, R., Osborne, J. F., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Cripps Clark, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the primary-secondary school transition. A review of the literature concerning supports and barriers to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics engagement at primary-secondary transition. Dealin University, Melbourne.
United Nations Educational Scientific Cultural Organization. (2017). Data extracted from World Inequality Database on Education. https://www.education-inequalities.org/
United States. (1964). National defense education act of 1958, as amended by the 88th Congress. Washington: U.S. Govt. Print. Off.
Wang, X. (2013). Why students choose STEM majors: Motivation, high school learning, and postsecondary context of support. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1081-1121. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213488622
Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. (2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy-value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Developmental Review, 33(4), 304-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001
Warne, R. T., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2019). The relationship between advanced placement mathematics courses and students’ STEM career interest. Educational Researcher, 48, 101-111.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1016
Zuckerman, H. (1977). Scientific elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. New York: Free Press.