Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 785–805 | Cite as

High School Students’ Perceptions of the Effects of International Science Olympiad on Their STEM Career Aspirations and Twenty-First Century Skill Development

  • Alpaslan Sahin
  • Ozcan Gulacar
  • Carol Stuessy
Article

Abstract

Social cognitive theory guided the design of a survey to investigate high school students’ perceptions of factors affecting their career contemplations and beliefs regarding the influence of their participation in the international Science Olympiad on their subject interests and twenty-first century skills. In addition, gender differences in students’ choice of competition category were studied. Mixed methods analysis of survey returns from 172 Olympiad participants from 31 countries showed that students’ career aspirations were affected most by their teachers, personal interests, and parents, respectively. Students also indicated that they believed that their participation in the Olympiad reinforced their plan to choose a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) major at college and assisted them in developing and improving their twenty-first century skills. Furthermore, female students’ responses indicated that their project choices were less likely to be in the engineering category and more likely to be in the environment or energy categories. Findings are discussed in the light of increasing the awareness of the role and importance of Science Olympiads in STEM career choice and finding ways to attract more female students into engineering careers.

Keywords

Science Olympiad Career interest Twenty-first century skills Engineering Gender I-SWEEEP 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665–683. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: how families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. doi: 10.3102/0002831211433290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Wong, B. (2013). Spheres of influence: what shapes young people’s aspirations at age 12/13 and what are the implications for education policy? Journal of Education Policy, 29(1), 58–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 564–582.Google Scholar
  5. Atkins. (2013). Britain’s got talented female engineers—Successful women in engineering: a careers research study. http://www.atkinsglobal.com/%7E/media/Files/A/Atkins-Global/Attachments/corporate/about-us/our-publications/Atkins_Britains got talented female engineers.pdf. Retrieved December 13 2013.
  6. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Bauer, C. F. (2005). Beyond “student attitude”: chemistry self-concept inventory for assessment of the affective component of student learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(12), 1864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: people, places, and pursuits. Washington: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  9. Burkam, D. T., & Lee, V. E. (2003). Mathematics, foreign language, and science coursetaking and the NELS: 88 transcript data (NCES 2003–01). Washington: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  10. Cleaves, A. (2005). The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 27(4), 471–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Council, N. R. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  12. Devine, F. (2004). Class practices: how parents help their children get good jobs. New York: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  13. Eisenhart, M. A. (1991). Conceptual frameworks for research circa 1991: ideas from a cultural anthropologist: implications for mathematics education researcher. Paper presented at the 13th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Blacksburg, VA.Google Scholar
  14. Executive Office of the President. (2009). Women and girls in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). http://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/women. Retrieved July 27, 2013.
  15. Faulkner, W. (2006). Genders in/of engineering: a research report. University of Edinburgh Economic and Social Research Council.Google Scholar
  16. Fouad, N. A., & Singh, R. (2011). Stemming the tide: why women leave engineering: center for the study of the workplace report. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  17. Gilmartin, S. K., Li, E., & Aschbacher, P. (2006). The relationship between secondary students’ interest in physical science or engineering, science class experiences, and family contexts: variations by gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12(2–3), 179–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Halpern, D., Aronson, J., Reimer, N., Simpkins, S., Star, J., & Wentzel, K. (2007). Encouraging girls in math and science (NCER 2003–2007). Washington: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  19. Instructional Assessment Resources. (2011). Assess teaching: response rates. http://www.utexas.edu/academic/ctl/assessment/iar/teaching/gather/method/survey-Response.php. Retrieved April 15, 2013.
  20. I-SWEEEP. (2013). About I-SWEEEP: our mission. http://www.isweeep.org/about-us/overview. Retrieved May 10, 2013.
  21. Jerald, C. D. (2009). Defining a 21st century education. http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Learn-About/21st-Century/Defining-a-21st-Century-Education-Full-Report-PDF.pdf. Retrieved May 15, 2013.
  22. Kidd, G., & Naylor, F. (1991). The predictive power of measured interests in tertiary course choice: the case of science. Australian Journal of Education, 35(3), 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kuechler, W. L., McLeod, A., & Simkin, M. G. (2009). Why don’t more students major in IS? Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 7(2), 463–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kutnick, P. J., Lee, P. Y., & Chan, Y. Y. (2012). Engineering education opportunities, perception, and career choice of secondary school students in Hong Kong SAR, China. Paper presented at the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition San Antonio, Texas.Google Scholar
  25. Lee, Y., & Lee, S. J. (2006). The competitiveness of the information systems major: an analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Information Sytems Education, 17(2), 211–222.Google Scholar
  26. Lent, R. W., Brown, S., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lent, R. W., Brown, S., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: a social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lent, R. W., Lopez, A. M., Lopez, F. G., & Sheu, H.-B. (2008). Social cognitive career theory and the prediction of interests and choice goals in the computing disciplines. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(1), 52–62. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2008.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2004). The new division of labor: how computers are creating the next job market. Princeton: Princeton University.Google Scholar
  30. Lindahl, B. (2007). A longitudinal study of students’ attitudes towards science and choice of career. Paper presented at the 80th NARST International Conference, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  31. Maarschalk, J. (1988). Scientific literacy and informal science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(2), 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Malgwi, C. A., Howe, M. A., & Burnaby, P. A. (2005). Influences on students’ choice of college major. Journal of Education for Business, 80(5), 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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(5), 877–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McGee-Brown, M. J. (n.d.). Science Olympiad: the role of competition in collaborative science inquiry. http://www.soinc.org/sites/default/files/uploaded_files/NSFcompres.pdf. Retrieved July 3, 2013.
  35. Microsoft Corporation. (2011). STEM perceptions: student & parent study. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2011/sep11/09-07MSSTEMSurveyPR.aspx. Retrieved June 16, 2013.
  36. Munro, M., & Elsom, D. (2000). Choosing science at 16: the influences of science teachers and careers advisers on students decisions about science subjects and science and technology careers. Cambridge: CRAC.Google Scholar
  37. Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2005). Primary science in the UK: a scoping study. Final report to the Wellcome Trust. London: Wellcome Trust.Google Scholar
  38. Myers, R. E., & Fouts, J. T. (1992). A cluster analysis of high school science classroom environments and attitude toward science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(9), 929–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Stats in brief: students who study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in postsecondary education. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009161.pdf. Retrieved April 6, 2013.
  40. National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: people, places, and pursuits. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12190. Retrieved April 5, 2013.
  41. National Science Board. (2007). National action plan: for addressing the critical needs of the U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education system. http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2007/stem_action.pdf. Retrieved April 5, 2013.
  42. National Science Foundation. (2008). Science and engineering degrees (1996–2008). http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11316/pdf/tab11.pdf. Retrieved from April 20, 2013.
  43. Navarro, R. L., Flores, L. Y., & Worthington, R. L. (2007). Mexican American middle school students’ goal intentions in mathematics and science: a test of social cognitive career theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 320–335. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Noel, M., Michaels, C., & Levas, M. G. (2003). The relationship of personality traits and self-monitoring behavior to choice of business major. Journal of Education for Business, 78(3), 153–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: women and minority students in science and mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 16, 153–222.Google Scholar
  46. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). The MILE guide: milestones for improving learning & education. http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/MILE_Guide_091101.pdf. Retrieved March 15, 2013.
  47. Ricks, M. M. (2006). A study of the impact of an informal science education program on middle school students’ science knowledge, science attitude, STEM high school and college course selections, and career decisions. Unpublished Dissertation. The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  48. Robelen, E. W. (2011). Awareness grows of importance of learning science beyond school. Education Week, 30(27), 2–5.Google Scholar
  49. Sabot, R. H., & Wakeman-Linn, J. (1991). Grade inflation and course choice. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 05(01), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sahin, A. (2013). STEM clubs and science fair competitions: effects on post-secondary matriculation. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(1), 5–11.Google Scholar
  51. Sahin, A., Ayar, M. C., & Adiguzel, T. (2014). STEM related after-school program activities and associated outcomes on student learning. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 13–26.Google Scholar
  52. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. New York: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  53. Schaub, M., & Tokar, D. M. (2005). The role of personality and learning experiences in social cognitive career theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(2), 304–325. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2004.09.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schleicher, A. (2007). Elevating performance in a ‘Flat World’. Education Week, 26(17), 79–82.Google Scholar
  55. Schweingruber, H. A., & Fenichel, M. (2010). Surrounded by Science: Learning Science in Informal Environments. National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  56. Sheu, H.-B., Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Miller, M. J., Hennessy, K. D., & Duffy, R. D. (2010). Testing the choice model of social cognitive career theory across Holland themes: a meta-analytic path analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(2), 252–264. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Silva, E. (2008). Online discussion of measuring skills for the 21st century. http://www.educationsector.org/discussions/discussions_show.htm?discussion_id=716323. Retrieved June 23, 2013.
  58. Stake, J. L. (2006). Pedagogy and student change in the women’s and gender studies classroom. Gender and Education, 18(2), 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sullivan, F. R. (2007). Robotics and science literacy: thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tamir, P. (1990). Factors associated with the relationship between formal, informal, and nonformal science learning. Journal of Environmental Education, 22(2), 34–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Trusty, J. (2002). Effects of high school course-taking and other variables on choice of science and mathematics college majors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80(4), 464–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Report of the academic competitiveness council. http://coalition4evidence.org/wp-content/uploads/ACC-report-final.pdf. Retrieved from July 13, 2013.
  64. Wagner, T. (2008). Rigor redefined. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 20–24.Google Scholar
  65. Wang, J., & Staver, J. R. (2001). Examining relationships between factors of science education and student career aspiration. Journal of Educational Research, 94(5), 312–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ware, N. C., & Lee, V. E. (1988). Sex differences in choice of college science majors. American Educational Research Journal, 25(4), 593–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Williams, C. M., & Subich, L. M. (2006). The gendered nature of career related learning experiences: a social cognitive career theory perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(2), 262–275. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2006.02.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wirt, J. L. (2011). An analysis of science Olympiad participants’ perceptions regarding their experience with the science and engineering academic competition. Retrieved from http://scholarship.shu.edu/dissertations/26/.June 1, 2013.
  69. Yoder, B. L. (2012). Engineering by the numbers. Waschington: American Society for Engineering Education.Google Scholar
  70. Zhang, W. (2007). Why IS: understanding undergraduate students’ intentions to choose an information systems major. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(4), 447–458.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Texas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Sam Houston State UniversityHuntsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations