Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 133–145 | Cite as

Men’s and Women’s Intentions to Persist in Undergraduate Engineering Degree Programs

  • James P. ConcannonEmail author
  • Lloyd H. Barrow


This is a quantitative study of 493 undergraduate engineering majors’ intentions to persist in their engineering program. Using a multiple analysis of variance analysis, men and women had one common predictor for their intentions to persist, engineering career outcome expectations. However, the best sociocognitive predictor for men’s persistence was not the same for women. Men’s persistence in undergraduate engineering was predicted by their abilities to complete the required coursework. Women’s persistence in undergraduate engineering depended upon their beliefs in getting good grades (A or a B). In brief, women’s intentions to persist in undergraduate engineering were dependent upon higher academic standards compared to men.


Engineering Self-efficacy Gender Women 


  1. Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Betz N, Hackett G (1981) The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. J Couns Psychol 28(5):399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Betz N, Hackett G (1983) The relationship of mathematics self-efficacy expectations to the selection of science-based college majors. J Vocat Behav 23:329–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradburn EM (1995) Engineering gender roles: a self-efficacy model of occupational choice and persistence. Cornell U, US, p 1Google Scholar
  6. Brainard S, Carlin L (1998) A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. J Eng Educ 87:369–375Google Scholar
  7. Britner SL, Pajares F (2006) Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. J Res Sci Teach 43:485–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Concannon JP (2008) A proposed social-cognitive model and ideas for practice. A paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for science teacher education, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  9. Concannon JP, Barrow LH (2008) A cross-sectional study of engineering self-efficacy. In Proceedings of the 2008 annual meeting of the American society of engineering education and exposition, Pittsburg, ASEE, 24 June 2008 (AC 2008-148)Google Scholar
  10. Concannon JP, Barrow LH (2009) A cross-sectional study of engineering students’ self-efficacy by gender, ethnicity, year, and transfer status. J Sci Educ Technol 18(2):163–172Google Scholar
  11. Cutrona CE, Russell DW (1987) The provisions of social relationships and adaptation to stress. Adv Pers Relatsh 1:37–67Google Scholar
  12. Hackett G, Betz NE (1989) An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy/mathematics performance correspondence. J Res Math Educ 20:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hackett G, Betz NE, Casas J, Rocha-Singh IA (1992) Gender, ethnicity, and social cognitive factors predicting the academic achievement of students in engineering. J Couns Psychol 39:527–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hampton NZ (1998) Sources of academic self-efficacy scale: an assessment tool for rehabilitation counselors. Rehabil Couns Bull 41:260–277Google Scholar
  15. Johnson A (2007) Unintended consequences: how science professors discourage women of color. Sci Educ 91:805–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lent RW, Hackett N (1987) Career self-efficacy: empirical status and future directions. J Vocat Behav 34:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lent R, Brown S, Larkin K (1984) Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence. J Couns Psychol 31(3):356–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lent R, Brown SD, Larkin K (1986) Self-efficacy in the prediction of academic performance and perceived career options. J Couns Psychol 33(3):265–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lent R, Brown S, Larkin K (1987) Comparison of three theoretically derived variables in predicting career and academic behavior: self-efficacy, interest congruence, and consequence thinking. J Couns Psychol 34(3):293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lent RW, Lopez FG, Bieschke DJ (1991) Mathematics self-efficacy: sources and relation to science-based career choice. J Couns Psychol 38:424–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lent RW, Brown SD, Gover MR, Nijjer SK (1996) Cognitive assessment of the sources of mathematics self-efficacy: a thought-listing analysis. J Career Assess 4:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lent RW, Sheu H, Schmidt J, Brenner B, Brown S, Gloster C, Schmidt L, Lyons H, Treistman D (2005) Social cognitive predictors of academic interests and goals in engineering: utility for women and students at historically black universities. J Couns Psychol 52:84–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lent RW, Singley D, Sheu H, Schmidt J, Schmidt L (2007) Relation of social-cognitive factors to academic satisfaction in engineering students. J Career Assess 15:87–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lopez FG, Lent RW (1992) Sources of mathematics self-efficacy in high school students. Career Dev Q 41:3–12Google Scholar
  25. Marra R, Bogue B (2006) Women engineering students self efficacy: a longitudinal multi-institution study. In: Proceedings of the 2006 women in engineering programs and advocates network conference, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  26. Matsui T, Matsui D, Ohnishi R (1990) Mechanisms underlying math self-efficacy learning of college students. J Vocat Behav 37:225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mau WC (2003) Factors that influence persistence in science and engineering career aspirations. Career Dev Q 51:234–243Google Scholar
  28. Moneta GB, Marcantonio M, Felicitas M (2007) Approaches to studying for final exams as a function of coping strategies. Personality Individ Differ 43:191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moos RH, Trickett E (1987) Classroom environmental scale manual, 2nd edn. Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
  30. National Science Foundation (1984) Women and minorities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  31. National Science Foundation (1990) Women and minorities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation, Arlington (NSF Publication No. 90–301)Google Scholar
  32. National Science Foundation (2005) Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  33. National Science Foundation (2006) Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  34. National Science Foundation (2007) Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics talent expansion program (STEP). National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA (NSF Publication No. 07-570)Google Scholar
  35. O’Brien KM, Friedman SM, Tipton LC, Linn SG (2000) Attachment, separation, and women’s vocational development: a longitudinal analysis. J Couns Psychol 47:301–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pajares F, Miller MD, Johnson MJ (1999) Gender differences in writing self-beliefs of elementary school students. J Educ Psychol 91:50–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pajares F, Britner SL, Valiante G (2000) Relation between achievement goals and self-beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemp Educ Psychol 25:406–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schaefers KG, Epperson DL, Mauta MM (1997) Women’s career development: can theoretical derived variables predict persistence in engineering majors? J Couns Psychol 44:173–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Scott A, Ciani K (2008) Effects of an undergraduate career class on men’s and women’s career decision-making self-efficacy and vocational identity. J Career Dev 34:263–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Seymour E, Hewitt N (1997) Talking about leaving: why undergraduates leave the sciences. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  41. Shepardson DP, Pizzini E (1992) Elementary teachers’ perceptions of the scientific ability of students. Sci Educ 76:147–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sloan ME (1975) Women engineers in the United States. Educ Horiz 53:102–105Google Scholar
  43. Vogt C (2003) An account of women’s progress in engineering: a social cognitive perspective. J Women Minor Sci Eng 9:217–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vogt CM (2007) A social cognitive construct validation: determining women’s and men’s success in engineering programs. J Higher Educ 78:338–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Westminster CollegeFultonUSA
  2. 2.University of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations