School students’ aspirations for STEM careers: The influence of self-concept, parental expectations, career outcome expectations, and perceptions of STEM professionals

Tho Siew Wei

Abstract

This study examined the processes that contributed to students’ aspirations for STEM careers and unpacked the relationships between students’ self-concept in science and mathematics learning, perceived parental expectations, perceptions of STEM professionals, career outcome expectations and STEM career aspirations. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse quantitative survey data of 2,477 primary and secondary school students studying in seven Asian regions (Hong Kong, Malaysia, Mainland China, Indonesia, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore). The results demonstrated that students’ self-concept, perceptions of STEM professionals, and their career outcome expectations all significantly and positively predicted their aspirations for STEM careers. However, this study failed to establish a direct relationship or positive correlation between perceived parental expectations and STEM career aspirations. Students’ self-concept negatively predicted their career outcome expectations related to seeking parental approval. While no significant positive effects of perceived parental expectations on career aspirations were found, an indirect effect of perceived parental expectations on STEM career aspirations via career outcome expectations was observed. Moreover, career outcome expectations mediated the relationships between students’ STEM career aspirations and their perceptions of STEM professionals more strongly than self-concept. The implications of these results for STEM education are discussed. © 2024 National Institute of Education, Singapore.

References

Archer, L., & DeWitt, J. (2016). Understanding young people’s science aspirations: How students form ideas about becoming a scientist. Routledge.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.

Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E.M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021302408382.

Breiner, J.M., Harkness, S.S., Johnson, C.C., & Koehler, C.M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594. 2011.00109.x.

Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation model (pp. 136–162). Sage.

Burušić, J., Šimunović, M., & Šakić, M. (2021). Technology-based activities at home and STEM school achievement: The moderating effects of student gender and parental education. Research in Science & Technological Education, 39(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1646717.

Chen, Y., Chiu, S.W.K., Zhu, J., & So, W.W.M. (2022). Maintaining secondary school students’ STEM career aspirations: The role of perceived parental expectations, self-efficacy, and cultural capital. International Journal of Science Education, 44(3), 434–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2032463.

Choy, M.W., & Yeung, A.S. (2022). Cognitive and affective academic self-concepts: Which predicts vocational education students’ career choice? International Journal of Educational Research Open, 3, 100123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijedro.2022.100123.

Chu, W.W., Mohd Hafiz, N.R., Mohamad, U.A., Ashamuddin, H., & Tho, S.W. (2022). A review of STEM education with the support of visualizing its structure through the CiteSpace software. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 33(1), 39–61. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09728-3.

Cozart, D.L., & Rojewski, J.W. (2015). Career aspirations and emotional adjustment of Chinese International graduate students. SAGE Open, 5(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015621349.

DeWitt, J., & Archer, L. (2015). Who aspires to a science career? A comparison of survey responses from primary and secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13), 2170–2192. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09500693.2015.1071899.

DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Archer, L., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). Young children’s aspirations in science: The unequivocal, the uncertain and the unthinkable. International Journal of Science Education, 35(6), 1037–1063. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.608197.

Du, X., & Wong, B. (2019). Science career aspiration and science capital in China and UK: A comparative study using PISA data. International Journal of Science Education, 41(15), 2136–2155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1662135.

Fouad, N.A., & Smith, P.L. (1996). A test of a social cognitive model for middle school students: Math and science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43(3), 338. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.43.3.338.

Garriott, P.O., Hultgren, K.M., & Frazier, J. (2017). STEM stereotypes and high school students’ math/science career goals. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(4), 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072716665825.

Gottfredson, L.S. (2005). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 545–579. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.28.6.545.

Gottfredson, L.S. (2005). Using Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise in career guidance and counseling. In S.D. Brown & R.W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 71–100).

Wiley.Hair, J.F. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education India.

Holmegaard, H.T., Madsen, L.M., & Ulriksen, L. (2014). To choose or not to choose science: Constructions of desirable identities among young people considering a STEM higher education programme. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 186–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.749362.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10705519909540118.

Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Scientific Software International.

Kang, J., & Keinonen, T. (2018). The effect of student-centered approaches on students’ interest and achievement in science: Relevant topic-based, open and guided inquiry-based, and discussion-based approaches. Research in Science Education, 48(4), 865–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9590-2.

Kang, J., Keinonen, T., & Salonen, A. (2021). Role of interest and self-concept in predicting science aspirations: Gender study. Research in Science Education, 51(S1), 513–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09905-w.