Abstract
This article offers explanations as to why good candidates for mathematics or physics degrees might opt to study subjects other than STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) subjects at university. Results come from analysis, informed by psychoanalytic theory and practice, of narrative-style interviews conducted with first-year undergraduates and from survey data. It is argued that psychoanalytic interpretations have a role in educational research. Also, it is shown that unconscious forces influenced young peoples’ decision making. Implications for policy are discussed, in particular, the issues of (a) the role of commitment and (b) being good enough to study a STEM discipline.
Résumé
Cet article vise à expliquer pourquoi de bons candidats aux études universitaires en mathématiques ou en physique choisissent plutôt des disciplines autres que les sciences, les technologies, le génie ou les mathématiques à l’université. Les résultats proviennent d’une part de l’analyse, étayée par la théorie et la pratique psychanalytique, d’entrevues de type narratif menées auprès d’étudiants de première année universitaire, et d’autre part de données d’enquête. Nous soutenons que les interprétations psychanalytiques ont un rôle à jouer dans la recherche en éducation, et nous montrons que certains facteurs inconscients influencent les décisions que prennent les étudiants. Certaines implications pour ce qui est des politiques sont discutées, en particulier le rôle de l’engagement personnel et la question de savoir si les étudiants ont les capacités requises pour s’inscrire à ces programmes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alsop, S. (Ed.). (2005). Beyond Cartesian dualism: Encountering affect in the teaching and learning of science. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
Archer, L., Halsall, A., & Hollingworth, S. (2007). Class, gender, (hetero) sexuality and schooling: Paradoxes within working class girls’ engagement with education and post-16 aspirations. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(2), 165–180.
Bibby, T. (2011). Education—An “impossible profession”? Psychoanalytic explorations of learning and classrooms. London, England: Routledge.
Black, L., Mendick, H., & Solomon, Y. (Eds.). (2009). Mathematical relationships: Identities and participation. London, England: Routledge.
Blenkinsop, S., McCrone, T., Wade, P., & Morris, M. (2006). How do young people make choices at 14 and 16? Nottingham, England: Department for Education and Skills.
Bøe, M. V., Henriksen, E. K., Lyons, T., & Schreiner, C. (2011). Participation in science and technology: Young people’s achievement-related choices in late-modern societies. Studies in Science Education, 47(1), 37–72.
Bourdieu, P. (1980). The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Cleaves, A. (2005). The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 471–486.
Coren, A. (1997). A psychodynamic approach to education. London, England: Sheldon Press.
Damasio, A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. San Diego, CA: Harcourt.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 215–225.
Freud, S. (1896). Further remarks on the neuro-psychoses of defence. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (1953–1974) (Vol. 3, pp. 159–185). London, England: Hogarth Press.
Freud, S. (1937). Analysis terminable and interminable. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 18, 373–405.
Gilbert, J. (Ed.). (2006). Science education in schools: Issues, evidence and proposals. London, England: Teaching and Learning Research Programme.
Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2013). Funding higher education. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/crosscutting/sivs/stem/
Hinshelwood, R. D. (1991). A dictionary of Kleinian thought (2nd ed.). London, England: Free Association Books.
Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2000). Doing qualitative research differently: Free association, narrative and the interview method. London, England: Sage.
Holm, J., & Kajander, A. (2012). Interconnections of knowledge and beliefs in teaching mathematics. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 12(1), 7–21.
House of Commons. (2009). Widening participation in higher education. London, England: The Stationery Office Limited.
Huckaby, M. F. (2011). Researcher/researched: Relations of vulnerability/relations of power. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24(2), 165–183.
Institute of Education. (2013). Understanding participation rates in post-16 mathematics and physics (UPMAP). Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.ioe.ac.uk/study/departments/cpat/4814.html
Lothians Equal Access Programme for Schools. (2010). LEAPS. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.leapsonline.org/
Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Michaels, A. (2009). The winter vault. London, England: Bloomsbury.
More maths grads. (2013). Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.moremathsgrads.org.uk/home.cfm
Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2014). A survey of psychological, motivational, family and perceptions of physics education factors that explain 15 year-old students’ aspirations to study post-compulsory physics in English schools. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 371–393.
Mujtaba, T., Reiss, M. J., Rodd, M., & Simon, S. (forthcoming). Methodological issues in mathematics education research when exploring issues around participation and engagement. In Design, results, and implications of large-scale studies in mathematics education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Nimier, J. (1993). Defence mechanisms against mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 13(1), 30–34.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2006). Evolution of student interest in science and technology studies. Paris, France: Author.
Pitt, A., & Britzman, D. (2003). Speculations on qualities of difficult knowledge in teaching and learning: An experiment in psychoanalytic research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(6), 755–776.
Reay, D., David, M.E., & Ball, S. (2005). Degrees of choice: Social class, race and gender in higher education (2nd ed.). Stoke-on-Trent, England: Trentham Books.
Reiss, M., Hoyles, C., Mujtaba, T., Riazi-Farzad, B., Rodd, M., Simon, S., & Stylianidou, F. (2011). Understanding participation rates in post-16 mathematics and physics: Conceptualising and operationalising the UPMAP Project. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 273–302.
Royal Society. (2007). A state of the nation report on science and mathematics education. London, England: Royal Society.
Salecl, R. (2009). Society of choice. Differences, 20(1), 157–180.
Thurston, W. (1994). On proof and progress in mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15(1), 29–37.
Waddell, M. (1998). Inside lives: Psychoanalysis and growth of personality. London, England: Routledge.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge.
Winnicott, D. W. (1964). The child, the family and the outside world. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rodd, M., Reiss, M. & Mujtaba, T. Qualified, But Not Choosing STEM at University: Unconscious Influences on Choice of Study. Can J Sci Math Techn 14, 330–345 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2014.938838
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2014.938838