Advertisement

Demographic Predictors of Students’ Science Participation over the Age of 16: an Australian Case Study

  • Grant CooperEmail author
  • Amanda Berry
  • James Baglin
Article

Abstract

Using the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) data, this paper aimed to examine if, and to what extent, demographic factors predict students’ participation in science over the age of 16 (post-16). While all the students participating in this study are attending Australian schools, the comprehensiveness of these datasets, together with inclusion of studies from around the world provides a useful reference point for an international audience. Over 7000 students are included in the analysis of this paper. Characteristics of focus in this paper include groups who have been identified as being underrepresented in past studies including Indigenous students, those from lower-socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds, sex differences and immigrants. Among the factors tested, Indigenous status was the strongest negative predictor of post-16 science participation. SES was also a relatively strong predictor of post-16 science participation. Compared to students categorised with an Australian-ancestry, first-generation and foreign-background students were more likely to participate in post-16 science. The findings of this study contribute to existing research on debates about equity and trends in science participation.

Keywords

Post-16 science participation Equity in science participation Low SES Indigenous Underrepresentation 

References

  1. Adamuti-Trache, M., & Andres, L. (2008). Embarking on and persisting in scientific fields of study: cultural capital, gender, and curriculum along the science pipeline. International Journal of Science Education, 30(12), 1557–1584.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701324208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agresti, A. (2007). An introduction to categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aikenhead, G. (1997). Toward a First Nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81(2), 217–238.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-237x(199704)81:2<217::aid-sce6>3.3.co;2-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aikenhead, G., & Jegede, O. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: a cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 269–287.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199903)36:3<269::aid-tea3>3.3.co;2-k CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ainley, J., Kos, J., & Nicholas, M. (2008). Participation in science, mathematics and technology in Australian education. ACER. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/acer_monographs/4/
  6. Akther, A., & Robinson, J. (2014). Immigrant students’ academic performance in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Singapore. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/publications-database.php/9559/immigrant-students-academic-performance-in-australia-new-zealand-canada-and-singapore
  7. Archer, L., Osborne, J., DeWitt, J., & Dillon, J. (2013). Young people’s science and career aspirations, age 10–14. Retrieved 19 April 2017, from https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/education/research/aspires/aspires-final-report-december-2013.pdf
  8. Aschbacher, P., Li, E., & Roth, E. (2009). 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.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20353 Google Scholar
  9. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2014). Estimates and projections, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, 2001 to 2026. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Power and ideology in education. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Business Council of Australia. (2014). A plan to maximise the comparative advantage of each sector of the Australian economy. Bca.com.au. Retrieved 14 November 2017, from http://www.bca.com.au/publications/building-australias-comparative-advantages
  12. Commonwealth of Australia. (2015). Closing the gap prime minister’s report 2015. Retrieved 21 April 2017, from https:/www.dpmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/Closing_the_Gap_2015_Report.pdf
  13. De Bortoli, L., & Thomson, S. (2010). Contextual factors that influence the achievement of Australia’s Indigenous students: results from PISA 2000–2006. ACER. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=ozpisa
  14. Dillon, J. (2009). On scientific literacy and curriculum reform. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 4(3), 201–213.Google Scholar
  15. Dreise, T., & Thomson, S. (2014). Unfinished business: PISA shows indigenous youth are being left behind. ACER. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=indigenous_education
  16. Entorf, H., & Tatsi, E. (2009). Migrants at school: educational inequality and social interaction in the UK and Germany. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46442586_Migrants_at_School_Educational_Inequality_and_Social_Interaction_in_the_UK_and_Germany
  17. Fullarton, S., & Ainley, J. (2000). Subject choice by students in year 12 in Australian secondary schools. ACER. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=lsay_research
  18. Fullarton, S., Walker, M., Ainley, J., & Hillman, K. (2003). Patterns of participation in year 12. ACER. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/lsay_research/37/
  19. Gorard, S., & See, B. (2009). The impact of socio-economic status on participation and attainment in science. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 93–129.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681821 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Green, D., Billy, J., & Tapim, A. (2010). Indigenous Australians’ knowledge of weather and climate. Climatic Change, 100(2), 337–354.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9803-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hackling, M., Ramseger, J., & Chen, H. (2017). Quality teaching in primary science education. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Halpern, D., Benbow, C., Geary, D., Gur, R., Shibley Hyde, J., & Gernsbacher, A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(1), 1–51.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hauck, W., & Donner, A. (1977). Wald’s test as applied to hypotheses in logit analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 72(360), 851–853.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2286473 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hofstein, A., Eilks, I., & Bybee, R. (2011). Societal issues and their importance for contemporary science education—a pedagogical justification and the state of the art in Isreal, Germany and the USA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1459–1483.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9273-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hugo, G. (2006). Temporary migration and the labour market in Australia. Australian Geographer, 37(2), 211–231.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00049180600672359 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaspura, A. (2017). Engineers make things happen: the need for an engineering pipeline strategy. Canberra. Retrieved from https:/www.engineersaustralia.org.au/resource-centre/resource/engineers-make-things-happen-report
  27. Kaushal, N., & Lu, Y. (2014). Recent immigration to Canada and the United States: a mixed tale of relative selection. International Migration Review, 49(2), 479–522.  https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kennedy, J. P., Lyons, T., & Quinn, F. (2014). The continuing decline of science and mathematics enrolments in Australian high schools. Teaching Science, 60(2), 34–46.Google Scholar
  29. Krajcik, J., & Czerniak, C. (2014). Teaching science in elementary and middle school (1st ed.). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  30. Lee, O., & Luykx, A. (2007). Science education and student diversity: race/ethnicity, language, culture, and socioeconomic status. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  31. Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2012). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (1st ed.). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lyons, T, & Quinn, F. (2010). Choosing science: understanding the declines in senior high school science enrolments. National Centre of Science, ICT and mathematics education tor rural and regional Australia (SiMERR Australia), University of New England.Google Scholar
  33. Lyons, T. (2006). The puzzle of falling enrolments in physics and chemistry courses: putting some pieces together. Research in Science Education, 36(3), 285–311.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-9008-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: country comparisons: international comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. Melbourne: Australian Council of Learned Academies.Google Scholar
  35. Martin, A., Liem, G., Mok, M., & Xu, J. (2012). Problem solving and immigrant student mathematics and science achievement: multination findings from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1054–1073.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McGee, L. (2014). Designing early literacy programs. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  37. Minutjukur, M., & Osborne, S. (2014). At the heart of learning (series paper 2 of 4): Witulya mulapa nganana mantjintjaku: from cultural devastation to cultural reinvention. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 10(1), 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Norris, R., & Hamacher, D. (2010). Astronomical symbolism in Australian Aboriginal rock art. Rock art research. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1009.4753
  39. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: critical reflections. London: Nuffield Foundation.Google Scholar
  40. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pascoe, B. (2014). Dark emu: black seeds agriculture or accident? (1st ed.). Broome: Magabala.Google Scholar
  42. PISA. (2012). Scaling procedures and construct validation of context questionnaire data. Retrieved 21 April 2017, from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/PISA%202012%20Technical%20Report_Chapter%2016.pdf
  43. Rigney, D., & Hemming, S. (2014). Is closing the gap ‘enough? Ngarrindjeri ontologies, reconciliation and caring for country. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 46(5), 536–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Settlage, J., Southerland, S., Smetana, L., & Lottero-Perdue, P. (2018). Teaching science to every child: using culture as a starting point (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Sjøberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2005a). The ROSE project: an overview and key findings. Retrieved from http://roseproject.no/network/countries/norway/eng/nor-Sjoberg-Schreiner-overview-2010.pdf
  46. Sjøberg, S. & Schreiner, C.(2005b). Science education and youth's identity construction - two incompatible projects? Retrieved from https://folk.uio.no/sveinsj/Values-ROSE-Schreiner-Sjoberg.pdf
  47. The Royal Society. (2008). Exploring the relationship between socioeconomic status and participation and attainment in science education. Royalsociety.org. Retrieved 14 November 2017, from https://royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2008/4294969756.pdf
  48. Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Cripps Clarke, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: engagement in STEM across the primary-secondary school transition. Canberra: Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.Google Scholar
  49. UNESCO. (2017). Cracking the code: Girls’ and women’s education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Unesdoc.unesco.org. Retrieved 14 November 2017, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0025/002534/253479E.pdf
  50. Wang, M., Chow, A., Degol, J., & Eccles, J. (2016). Does everyone’s motivational beliefs about physical science decline in secondary school?: heterogeneity of adolescents’ achievement motivation trajectories in physics and chemistry. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(8), 1821–1838.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0620-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ward, T. (2013). Sport in Australian national identity (1st ed.). London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationRMIT UniversityBundooraAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations