Over the past decade there have been growing concerns in the United States and abroad regarding a persistent and profound shortage of qualified secondary science teachers, particularly in urban schools (Banilower et al., 2018; Wronowski, 2018). This shortage is likely to grow due to rapid pedagogical shifts and pressures experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic (Carver-Thomas et al., 2021). The lack of highly qualified science teachers in urban schools contributes to students being taught science by teachers outside of their area of expertise and low quality or inconsistent science instruction, with detrimental impacts on student achievement (Banilower et al., 2018). The recruitment of new teachers is the foremost approach to overcome the persistent shortages of qualified teachers (Harrell et al., 2019), particularly in science fields (Plisch, 2015).

Despite the shortage of science teachers, research on science teacher recruitment is sparse. There is a particular need for more research into how and why undergraduate science majors decide to teach (Coon, 2020). While personal factors, such as geographic proximity to one’s home and feelings of professional efficacy, feature prominently in teachers’ expressed interest in teaching in urban settings (See et al., 2020; Tran et al., 2020), these studies tend to overlook the unique career pathways, options, and social pressures operating within STEM fields (Quigley et al., 2024). Specifically, literature addressing science teacher recruitment overemphasizes financial incentives, which have limited impact on teacher recruitment and retention in urban schools (Olitsky et al, 2020; See et al., 2020). Thus, a more nuanced view of the career pathways of science teachers is essential to strengthen the pathway of highly qualified and effective educators who are committed to teaching in urban settings.

The present study was designed to examine this career decision-making process through a retrospective narrative methodology. Participants included 14 undergraduate science majors who enrolled in the Science Educators Science Educators for Urban Schools (SEUS) program, a context-specific secondary science teacher education program for urban schools. Specifically, this study addressed the following question: How do undergraduate science majors describe their pathway to becoming an urban science teacher?

Theoretical Framework: Social Cognitive Career Theory

Enhancing science teacher recruitment necessitates a longitudinal perspective of the accumulation of experiences that shape career-related decisions. Grounded in Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory, social cognitive career theory (SCCT) attends to the dynamic interplay between personal (e.g. identity), behavioral (e.g., self-efficacy), and contextual factors (e.g., social supports) that shape career choice (Lent et al., 1994). In particular, the relationship between the social context and cognition is a strength of SCCT framework for predicting and understanding the decision-making process (Lent & Brown, 2019). Thus, SCCT allows for an examination of how social and academic contexts serve as barriers or supports and make certain career options more, or less, available to certain individuals over time.

SCCT is the preeminent framework investigating career-related decisions and pathways in scientific and technical fields (Lent & Brown, 2019). While most research that has employed SCCT is quantitative, utilizing survey methods, a nascent body of qualitative research has used SCCT to examine the social processes underlying career choice and persistence in the sciences (Byars-Winston & Rogers, 2018; Fouad & Santana, 2017; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2021a; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2024). For example, Marco-Bujosa and colleagues (2024) utilized SCCT to problematize the culture of science, science departments, and institutional structures to reveal the ways in which higher education effectively restricts access to the sciences through elitism and exclusion.

Only a few studies have used SCCT to understand the career-related experiences of science teachers. Findings offer insight into the complex interplay between personal, cognitive, and social factors involved in science teaching (Byram et al., 2021; Dos Santos, 2020). For example, Dos Santos (2020) used SCCT to offer insight into the shortage of secondary science teachers at international schools in Taiwan. Findings illuminated how the cultural backgrounds of teachers from outside of Taiwan shaped their perception of how the Taiwanese culture supported or detracted from their goals as science teachers. Findings pointed to attending to cultural awareness in professional development to help international teachers productively address cultural differences. While these studies highlight the interplay between the social context and the individual in science teaching, there is a need to understand this interplay in teacher recruitment as the first stage of science teacher development (Luft et al., 2011).

The present study utilized SCCT to interpret undergraduate science majors’ career pathways into an urban teacher education program. Analyzing teachers’ retrospective accounts of their career pathway provides insights into how participants interpreted their career pathways, and how they saw connections between their background, contexts, and choices that drew them to urban science education. Utilizing SCCT to analyze science teachers’ retrospective accounts will offer valuable insight into how and why they decided to teach within a more holistic consideration of their lived experience navigating the decision-making process.

Literature Review

Recruiting Science Teachers for Urban Schools

Urban schools share a variety of complicated, interrelated issues that have implications for both the recruitment of new teachers and teacher effectiveness. Urban school districts are characterized by a large, dense school district bureaucracy, a lack of material resources, infrastructure, and professional support, all of which are associated with high levels of teacher turnover (Banilower et al., 2018; Milner, 2012; See et al., 2020) and a concentration of inexperienced and less-credentialed teachers (Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Harrell et al., 2019). The disparity is particularly high in the sciences. For example, a recent national survey in the United States found that 30% of novice science teachers taught in the lowest quartile of low-income schools as compared to 24% of veteran science teachers (Trygstad, 2020).

The term urban is often used as an indicator of a racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse student body with high concentrations of poverty and low levels of student achievement on standardized tests (Matsko & Hammerness, 2014; Milner, 2012). Research indicates teachers, who are mostly white, female, and middle-class, tend to migrate away from urban to suburban schools, non-white to white, and high poverty to low poverty schools (Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Harrell et al., 2019). Research on teacher education for urban educational contexts has emphasized the centrality of developing teacher skills to address the political dimensions of the educational contexts, as well as the importance cross-cultural experiences to enhance teacher effectiveness (Achinstein et al., 2010; Freedman & Appleman, 2008).

Recent scholarship has critiqued the traditional approach to science education as promoting Eurocentric values which exclude and marginalize the vast majority of youth attending urban schools. (Mensah, 2022). Therefore, effectively teaching science in urban contexts extends beyond content knowledge to taking critical approach toward science education and relating the traditional curriculum to the lives and interests so that students could see themselves in science (Mensah, 2019; Mensah & Jackson, 2018). While these background experiences and mindsets centering diversity and equity have been explored in teacher education and retention in urban schools (Kolovou, 2023; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2023; Olitsky et al., 2020), less is known about how these more critical and equity-oriented mindsets factor into the recruitment of science teachers to teach in urban schools.

Recruiting Undergraduate Science Majors to Teach

Content expertise (Carlsen, 1993) and knowledge of the nature and practices of science (Duschl, 1987) are essential to designing instruction that promotes deep conceptual understanding of science. Accordingly, most teacher preparation and state licensure programs require secondary science teachers to hold a bachelor’s degree in their content area of specialization (Coon, 2020). However, a recent national survey found that 17% of beginning teachers currently teaching secondary science courses lacked a certification in a science discipline, indicating they were either teaching outside of their field or were teaching under an emergency certification due to a lack of qualified applicants (Trygstad, 2020). Successfully recruiting more undergraduate science majors is essential to enhancing the quality of science teaching and addressing teacher shortages (Banilower et al., 2018; Plisch, 2015).

Along with the general reasons motivating teachers – a desire to work with youth (Westerlund et al., 2011), prior teaching experiences (Luft et al., 2011), and the potential to make a positive social impact (Dominguez et al., 2015; Vaidya & Thompson, 2020) – research detailing why science majors choose a career in teaching indicates motivations unique to science. Specifically, science teachers are motivated by their love of science (Coon, 2020; Dominguez et al., 2015), their own positive science learning experiences, and the opportunity to continue to indirectly engage with science through teaching (Coon, 2020). Therefore, for science educators, the path to teaching is intrinsically connected to their interest in science.

However, individuals with science degrees are less likely to be interested in teaching than those with non-science degrees (Ingersoll & May, 2012; Moin et al., 2005). Why is this the case? Emerging research on career pathways and higher education reveals the science career ecosystem, or network of educational supports, pathways, experiences, and values (Quigley et al., 2024) is distinctively different from those of other content areas experienced by prospective teachers outside of science. In a study of the differences in undergraduate career choice by discipline, Wiggan and colleagues (2021) found science majors were less interested in teaching compared to their peers in other content areas, due to financial factors, notably low teaching salaries, and social factors, notably the negative perception of teaching in comparison with traditional science and research careers.

Over the past few decades, recruitment efforts have accordingly focused on financial factors, and, only more recently and to a lesser extent, the social elements involved in choosing a career in science education. Much of the literature on financial incentives focuses explicitly on recruiting teachers to teach in high-need school districts, usually in the United States. For science teachers, these financial incentive programs include the Robert F. Noyce program through the National Science Foundation, Woodrow Wilson Fellowships (now Citizens and Scholars), and Perkins loans. Such programs incentivize teaching in high-need schools to offset the costs of teacher education in the form of loan forgiveness (Olitsky et al., 2020). Overall, findings indicate limited impact for either recruiting individuals who had not already considered teaching or retaining teachers in high need schools (Liou et al., 2010; Olitsky et al, 2020; See et al., 2020).

To enhance interest in teaching as a career, recent scholarship has shifted attention to the shifting the culture of science departments to both create career pathways and encourage and teaching as a viable science career (Foote & Knaub, 2018; Plisch, 2015). Historically, undergraduate science programs have been critiqued for presenting narrow trajectory of science curricula and teaching focused on careers in research in academia or industry (OECD, 2008; Quigley et al., 2024). This trend is exacerbated when university professors themselves have negative views of teaching that they (un)knowingly pass on to their students (Breakall et al., 2021; Logan et al., 2020). These alternate career options, in addition to insufficient recruitment efforts, make it difficult for undergraduate science majors to consider a teaching career (Coon, 2020; Moin et al., 2005).

Programmatic interventions designed to critique and transform the culture of science departments have demonstrated increased interest in teaching among undergraduates. Foote and Knaub (2018) reported on one such program for physics, PhysTEC, which has been implemented across a variety of universities with positive, sustained results. Findings indicate the departmental changes, including enhanced opportunities for students to engage in teaching activities, not only supported the recruitment of more physics teachers, but also increased the overall number of physics majors.

Overall, the existing literature reveals that the career pathway of science teachers is distinct from other teachers in several ways, including a love of science, numerous highly respected career options, and a low value for teaching. The literature also indicates unique opportunities to tap into and nurture teacher commitment through an emphasis on social justice goals (Kolovou, 2023; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2023; Olitsky et al., 2020). Thus, the present study was designed to explore how undergraduate science majors connected the dots between the various content-based, personal, and contextual factors to enroll in a secondary urban science education program.

Methods

We employed a narrative research methodology that retrospectively examined how and why undergraduate science majors decided to teach. Narrative research is based upon storytelling. Telling stories provides an opportunity for teachers to “make meaning of their experience” (Clandinin et al., 1995, p. 154). Narrative research provides insight into the more cognitive and affective processes of the narrator as they interpret and connect different experiences, making it an appropriate methodology for exploring career pathways. Specifically, we utilized SCCT as an interpretive guide to explore how participants connected the dots between their backgrounds and experiences in their decision to teach.

Researcher Positionality

In interpretive research, the researchers play a key role in making sense of participants’ experiences. As researchers, we must critically evaluate our own backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives relative to the research being conducted and to our research participants (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Rivera Maulucci & Mensah, 2015). The primary research team consisted of four researchers with expertise in science education, teacher education, and higher education. All identified as white; three identified as female and one as male. All attended public schools in the United States in predominately white, suburban settings. Two held undergraduate degrees in the sciences, one of whom taught secondary science in a large urban school district.

The research team entered the study with a critical lens toward science education and the factors that influence the career pathways of teachers. However, given the limited racial and cultural diversity of the research team, our interpretation may not adequately reflect the experiences of all participants (Rivera Maulucci & Mensah, 2015). We tried to account for this throughout our analytic process. Prior to data analysis, we reflected on our background experiences and discussed how these experiences shaped the perspective we brought to our interpretation of the data. We periodically returned to these initial discussions to consider omissions and inconsistencies in our analyses to critique and question our interpretations, particularly for individuals whose identities and life experiences differed from our own (Rivera Maulucci & Mensah, 2015). We also utilized an external auditor, who was not directly involved in the research, to critically review our analyses and identify potential biases or misinterpretations (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Research Context

The data used in this study were drawn from a larger research study of the Science Educators for Urban Schools (SEUS) program, a one-year master’s degree program leading to licensure for secondary science education in a major metropolitan area in the northeastern region of the United States. SEUS is a context-specific urban science teacher education program funded by the Robert F. Noyce Program of the National Science Foundation. The program was designed to recruit, prepare, and support individuals holding a bachelor’s degree in science to teach in urban schools. SEUS required graduates to commit to one year of teaching in an urban public school in exchange for each semester of financial support.

The program was advertised to undergraduate science majors at regional and national recruitment events. Within the same university, SEUS representatives visited undergraduate science courses. Selection to the program was competitive, based upon GPA and prior experience in urban educational contexts and/or with youth of racially and socioeconomically minoritized identities. SEUS graduated 37 candidates over a 10-year period and reported retention rates that exceeded national averages: 100% in urban schools for the two-year requirement and 73% remained in urban schools beyond their Noyce obligations (Marco-Bujosa et al., 2021b). Thus, SEUS represents a powerful context for examining the career choices of committed urban science educators.

Participants and Data Sources

This study focused on all 14 participants (“Scholars”) from 3 consecutive annual cohorts (Table 1). The demographic background of the Scholars included female (N = 8) and male (N = 6), white (N = 10), Black (N = 2), and Asian (N = 2). Most were raised an attended school in the United States; two participants had lived and attended school outside of the United States. Most attended suburban public schools (N = 8). All participants held an undergraduate degree in a science field, including biology (N = 6), chemistry (N = 3), environmental science/geoscience (N = 3), and physics (N = 2). Most enrolled in SEUS immediately following completion of their undergraduate studies and had no prior work experience (N = 8).

Table 1 Participant information
Full size table

The primary data source was an entrance interview implemented at the start of the program. Much of the entrance interview was retrospective in nature, framed by the key elements of the SCCT framework. Scholars were prompted to share prior experiences, personal factors, and contextual elements that shaped or influenced their pathway into urban science education. Interviews were conducted by either the first author or a trained graduate assistant. All were audio-recorded and transcribed for further analysis. Interviews averaged 42 minutes in duration. Supporting data from other sources collected during SEUS were also utilized to triangulate findings, including additional interviews and written reflections.

Data Analysis

The researchers utilized a two-stage analytic approach that was interpretive and exploratory (Braun & Clarke, 2006). First, we developed a qualitative coding scheme based upon the elements of the SCCT framework to interpret Scholars’ narratives. The codes were drawn from the literature on SCCT and are grouped by the three domains of personal/background factors, cognitive/affective behaviors, and the social context (Table 2). The interview transcripts were broken into segments based upon prompt and response.

Table 2 SCCT coding scheme
Full size table

Four researchers independently coded the interviews. Weekly meetings were structured to discuss individual coding of one interview at a time to work toward a collective agreement before moving onto the next. The purpose was to mark all occurrences of codes and identify the SCCT elements involved in the decision to teach science (Warren & Karner, 2005). Overall agreement was 92%, with 100% agreement after discussion. Codes were visually summarized in data displays to search for patterns (Miles et al., 2014). (See Table 3 for an example.)

Table 3 Example of a visual display of SCCT codes
Full size table

Given that most elements of the SCCT framework were evidenced in teachers’ retrospective accounts (Table 3), the second stage of analysis involved memoing to connect and trace the relationships between the SCCT factors that influenced Scholars’ decision to teach (Groenewald, 2004). In conducting this holistic analysis, we used open coding procedures. We drew upon the codes from the first stage while maintaining the lived experiences of the participants shared in their retrospective accounts of how they decided to enroll in the SEUS program (Smith, 1994). This analytic approach involved reviewing each interview transcript multiple times and utilizing participants’ own words as open codes that reflected the participants perceptions and decision-points. This more holistic approach also attended to the non-linear process of decision-making and storytelling (Webster & Mertova, 2007). The research team then shared and discussed these case memos to identify shared themes representing the decision-making process of the Scholars (Miles et al., 2014).

Efforts to Ensure Trustworthiness

The methodology addressed four aspects of trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Credibility was assured having the data independently analyzed by four members of the research team with weekly in-depth discussions to establish agreement. An audit trail was maintained in weekly meetings throughout the analytic process. To enhance transferability, detailed descriptions of the participants, context, and research methods are provided to allow the reader to determine the applicability of the study (Shenton, 2004). Dependability and confirmability were ensured by using a large research team with diverse areas of expertise (e.g., science education, higher education, and chemistry, respectively). We drew upon multiple data sources for the purpose of triangulation across data sources (Smith, 1994). We also relied upon an external auditor who was involved with the programmatic elements of SEUS yet was not involved directly with data collection or analysis to provide alternative interpretations (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Limitations

By focusing on the experiences of a small sample of teachers from one teacher education program in a private university, the findings of this study may not be transferable to all prospective secondary urban science teachers across all teacher education settings. In addition, the data was primarily retrospective in nature, and was dependent upon self-reported data of experiences, mindsets, and decisions. Moreover, narrative research is, by design, grounded in participant interpretation of their experiences. Despite the limitations, the findings offer insight into the lived experiences of undergraduate science majors who decided to pursue science teaching in urban schools as a career.

Findings

Findings indicate a complex interplay of experiences that shaped science majors’ decision to enroll in the SEUS program. First, we identify salient themes in the pathways of the 14 Scholars that represent the process by which they decided to teach. Then, we present case studies that highlight different entry points into the pathway to teaching. Cases are structured to illustrate the decision-making processes through a more holistic, non-linear account of undergraduate science majors’ journeys into the SE program.

While the Scholars were nearly evenly split between those individuals who enrolled in SE following the completion of their undergraduate degree and those with some work experience (Table 1), their narratives revealed similar processes in arriving at the decision to teach. All Scholars, with the exception of Rose, enrolled in college with the intent to follow a traditional science career path. (Rose changed her major from mathematics education to environmental science as an undergraduate, and subsequently explored science careers before returning to her interest in teaching.) Central to Scholars’ narratives was the intentional eschewing of the values of science that emphasize scientific research, innovation, and healthcare and devalue relational, socially oriented, and non-technical work. Three themes involving challenging the values and norms of undergraduate science majors were evident across all 14 Scholars’ narratives:

  1. 1.

    Rejecting narrow science career pathways

  2. 2.

    Valuing teaching as a viable science career pathway

  3. 3.

    Centering social impact as a career goal

We present three cases to illustrate the lived experiences of participants on their pathway to the SEUS program: Ruth, Kelsey, and Rod (Table 1). The three participants were selected purposively to illustrate the similarities and the nuances in how their backgrounds and the values of science intersected to shape their pathway into teaching. Cases are organized by theme to illustrate the decision-making process, with an emphasis upon the SCCT factors that emerged within each theme. While this presentation by theme is not chronological, the themes attend to the complex interplay between the social context of science with the backgrounds of participants.

Ruth

Rejecting Narrow Science Career Pathways

Ruth identified as female, African American, and a first-generation college student. She attended urban public schools in a major metropolitan area in the northeastern USA. Ruth explained that she did not enjoy science in elementary and middle school. She attributed her love of science to one teacher in her first year of high school. As she explained, “I can’t remember anything special about science before I went to high school. Yeah, so it’s really interesting that it just took that one teacher to open up that whole field” (Learning Experience). Inspired by her interest in science, Ruth applied to a leadership-based scholarship program to attend a national research university for her undergraduate studies.

Through this program, Ruth received financial, academic, and social support to attend college as a science major. As a science leadership cohort, students enrolled in all core science classes together, such as chemistry, as first year college students. Ruth explained this support network was helpful to her adjustment to college and her experience in college science classes; “it was my first time being away from home... and studying science, which was really hard–it helped to have those nine other people with me to support me and say, ‘It’s okay, we’re all going through this together” (Proximal Social Context).

Despite this support, Ruth encountered academic challenges in her science classes. As Ruth explained, “I was having a really hard time in science, and I was like, ‘I don’t know if this is for me; I’m ready to quit’” (Self-efficacy). Yet, as a part of the science leadership group, she felt additional social pressure to pursue a science career in medicine or research. Ruth reflected, “There was kind of this stigma that if you were in science [program name], then you have to go and you have to do research in a lab” (Proximal Social Context). Thus, the program, while intended to encourage students to persist in science, contributed to social pressures that provided a narrow view of successful science careers.

Valuing Teaching as a Viable Science Career Pathway

Throughout high school and college, Ruth worked closely with elementary aged children in neighborhood summer camps. While she enjoyed these experiences, she viewed them as a fun extracurricular. As she explained, “I've worked with kids in camps... and I just never considered teaching as something that I would do during my career” (Interest). For Ruth, she recognized academic success as leading to a potential career. Though she was herself inspired by a science teacher, at this point, she did not acknowledge her own work with youth as a potential career opportunity given her pursuit of an undergraduate science degree.

Ruth explained that in her senior year of college, she met with her mentor in the leadership program who helped her connect her passion and interest in working with children to a career in teaching. Ruth explained that her peers and mentor encouraged her to teach; “They were like ‘No, you’re good at this. That’s what you’re good at; that’s what you’re passionate about; that’s what you should go do.’ So it really helped to have that support from them, too, and from my mentor” (Proximal Social Context). This support, from her science community, was essential to her deviation from a traditional path.

Upon graduation, Ruth taught the first grade for two years at a charter school in an urban community. Ruth explained that it felt more comfortable working with young children based on her prior experience with summer camp. Working at the elementary level in an urban school, Ruth deepened her understanding of how differences in disciplinary values and accountability pressures influenced the opportunity for urban youth to learn science.

I also saw that what happened a lot for the elementary teachers at my school was that science didn’t need to fall by the wayside, because there was so much more emphasis placed on teaching them how to read, teaching them how to write. (Proximal Social Context)

Ruth initially saw her pathway into education as separate from her interest in science. It was through her experiences as an elementary teacher that she integrated these two pathways.

Centering Social Impact as a Career Goal

Ruth saw becoming a secondary science teacher as an opportunity to transform students’ lives through science, both in terms of increasing accessibility, and reframing the purpose of science in students’ lives. With respect to access, Ruth commented,

The main reason why I also moved up to secondary/middle school is that.... as you get older, you don’t see that same curiosity and that same desire to want to engage in science and really feel like science is a viable path for them. (Goals)

Ruth explained that her identity as an African American female inspired her to be a role model for her students. Ruth explained that part of her decision was, “realizing that there weren’t that many people that looked like me in my field” (Outcome Expectations). Ruth expressed this sentiment in the following statements about the deep inequities in accessing high quality science teaching; “that’s the kind of education that I had and looking at how there tends to be a lack of teachers that are as invested in urban schools that want to teach science” (Distal Social Context).

Relatedly, Ruth conveyed a sense of professional empowerment in her teaching to challenge, critique, and transform the educational system that deprives students in urban schools of a high- quality science education.

You can create space in your own classroom to talk about things like discrimination… in science classes there tends to a very rigid curriculum that you have to follow… so that really got me started thinking about how you can incorporate those things and not have it be such a teaching-to-the-test kind of curriculum. (Outcome Expectations)

Overall, Ruth channeled her own experiences as a science learner within an urban school system to redefine outcome expectations for what it means to be successful in science to engaging in critical reflection on her own experiences as a science learner, to transform how science is taught in urban schools. Interestingly, Ruth’s career pathway illustrates the unique pressures she faced in beginning her undergraduate studies on the science path. Not choosing a traditional science career was stigmatized, particularly within the selective scholarship program. Moreover, even when she decided to pursue a teaching career, she initially saw teaching as distinct and separate from her love of science until she perceived both the need and her ability to be a transformative leader in science education.

Kelsey

Rejecting Narrow Science Career Pathways

Kelsey identified as a white female who attended public school in a socioeconomically, racially, and culturally diverse suburb of a large city in the northeastern USA. Kelsey explained that she immediately felt out of place on her college campus because her high school was racially diverse, with approximately half of the students being African American and half Latino. On the other hand, the student body in at her university was socioeconomically privileged and “white-washed” (Learning Experiences).

Distinguishing herself from her peers in college was central to Kelsey’s narrative of her pathway to the decision to enroll in the SEUS program. Kelsey explained that she felt like she had a completely different mindset in comparison to her peers who were also majoring in biology in terms of career goals and her motivations toward service. Kelsey reflected; “I came in as a biology major, and I never was pre-med. And, I pretty much instantly knew I didn’t want to do lab work. So, I didn’t really know what I could do with biology” (Outcome Expectations).

At the same time, Kelsey explained that she was drawn to more service and teaching-oriented work through her college studies, including working as a peer tutor and teaching assistant. However, she recalled that her awareness of the social privilege of most students at her university, “gave me the sense of anything I do here I can’t really help people here. They’re not the people who need help” (Proximal Social Context). Despite knowing she was not interested in a career in medicine or science research like her peers, Kelsey followed a vague science-related career path for her first three years of college because she was not aware of other options.

Valuing Teaching as a Viable Science Career Pathway

Though Kelsey was open to exploring ways to combine her inclination toward service and her love of science, these options were not made available within her core academic experience. Kelsey independently engaged in a service-learning experience run by her university. She worked at a school science club for girls at a local urban elementary school as an undergraduate. Drawing upon her own experiences as a woman in science, Kelsey was inspired by the program’s emphasis on inspiring girls to pursue science. She recalled, “We would go over to the [Public School] and... it’s sort of the idea of showing little girls you might find science fun. You can do this too. We’re all women in science,” (Identity). However, Kelsey did not connect this educational experience to a potential career goal. As she reflected,

I think I always had a stigma against being a teacher. And, definitely, when I was little, I just thought it was dumb that anyone would want to be a teacher because then you would have to be in a school your whole life. (Proximal Social Context)

It was not until the end of her junior year of college, at a biology career networking event, that Kelsy had the opportunity to meet with the SEUS program director. After this one meeting, Kelsey saw teaching as a natural outlet for her interests in science and education; “I really like talking about science and I care a lot about public education” (Interest). Kelsey explained that this conversation gave her the validation and direction she needed and immediately applied to the SEUS program for the following academic year.

Centering Social Impact as a Career Goal

Similar to Ruth, Kelsey’s experiences in public education developed her awareness of educational inequities that inhibited students’ opportunities to learn science. Kelsey stated that her underlying goal in becoming a teacher was to make science more accessible. Comments reflecting this sentiment included, “I think it’s important to make [science] accessible to everyone,” “most teachers aren’t able to directly connect [science] back to most people’s lives,” and “this shouldn’t be closed off to you just because you’re in a public school” (Goal). While she expressed concern that she was perhaps embodying a “white savior mentality” (Outcome Expectation) that would cause more harm than good, including expressing concerns such as, “what does it mean to be a white teacher coming into an urban classroom?” (Outcome Expectation) she came to see her role as “empowering [students] to make their own movements” (Outcome Expectation). She framed her role as a science teacher in an urban school as transforming student opportunities to not only learn, but also do science.

Like Ruth, Kelsey’s initial interest in pursuing an undergraduate science major limited her career options. Kelsey also similarly drew upon her own educational experiences in forging her path as a science teacher and relied upon an external mentor to “connect the dots” (Proximal Social Context) between her extracurricular interest in service, children, and advancing equity.

Rod

Rejecting Narrow Science Career Pathways

Rod is from a self-described lower middle-class family from a suburban community. He attended public schools throughout his K-12 education. Rod recalled that the schools he attended were well-funded, which provided students access to excellent teachers and many advanced placement courses. Rod developed an interest in both history and science, specifically physics, in high school. He acknowledged that his interest in science was also influenced by his family, as his parents and older siblings held careers in medicine and engineering.

Rod attended a small, liberal arts college on a full scholarship and double majored in both physics and history. He explained he first chose these majors based on, “not knowing anything else” (Choice). Rod recalled that his introductory college physics courses were challenging for him, as he discovered he was lacking some key skills. “I was very good at filling in the patterns that were set up for me rather than actual critical thinking” (Self-Efficacy). Rod described that his experiences in college physics as “unnecessarily difficult” and “weed out classes” (Learning Experiences) alerted him to the inherently exclusionary nature of physics.

The farther I got into the physics program... the more I was really like kind of grossed out by the way physics teachers think about physics… as the pinnacle of knowledge and difficulty. (Learning Experience)

Rod explained that his experiences as an undergraduate physics major made him less interested in a career in physics or the sciences, leading him to break with family tradition.

Valuing Teaching as a Viable Science Career Pathway

Rod explained that his family strongly valued education, and, throughout his childhood “emphasized education as a way of the next generation being better” (Background). Interestingly, throughout the course of his undergraduate studies in physics, Rod became actively involved in an education research and development grant to transform the culture of the physics department. Through this grant, Rod developed a critical lens toward physics education by attending department meetings, curriculum development, and teaching undergraduate physics courses. In this position, Rod directly confronted issues of educational inequity in science. He observed that “kids coming from like a poor place that doesn’t have calculus they pretty much are locked out of physics... unless they want to like kill themselves taking so many classes and so much calculus” (Distal Social Context). Over the course of his undergraduate career, he found himself in education related contexts, yet did not consider education a viable career option until he became dissatisfied with science. Rod reflected that this opportunity to teach in his department developed his interest in becoming a teacher.

That was like my first time like kind of leading anything education-wise. Like, I tutored and stuff, but never in front of a group of ten people. And, I wanted to do more of that. (Background)

Similar to Ruth and Kelsey, Rod came to realize educational activities he had already been engaged in as a science major could be a viable career option.

Yea, I realized I did a lot of soul searching in my junior year and realized that I’ve been doing education-y related things for a while um... tutoring and stuff like that. And, that I liked that more than doing research for sure. (Choice)

Rod began taking education courses in his junior year, but it was too late for him to earn teacher certification through his undergraduate studies. Rod explained that he was committed to teaching without certification after he graduated. With advice from his education professor, he applied to private boarding schools. While committed to public education, he shared that his decision to work in the private school was not only an option to gain valuable teaching experience without a license, but also financially motivated. He reflected, “I needed money cuz I don’t have any family money to back on and I don’t have much money of my own” (Identity).

Centering Social Impact as a Career Goal

Rod saw urban education as a place where he could make a difference. He was struck by the extravagance of the private school, which solidified his commitment to urban education; “Being there and seeing the amount of money they have and like the amount of ridiculousness in terms of everything that goes on at that school. Within one week I was looking at grad programs for [urban education],” (Choice). This quote conveys that Rod was highly aware of the differences in private education, and funding, and his own philosophy of education. Specifically, equity was at the forefront of his mind and his goals as an educator.

Based in his undergraduate experiences, he also believed he could have a greater opportunity to engage in more transformative science pedagogy in urban schools. He described urban education as the place where “the inconsistencies contradictions in our society come through the strongest,” but also where “a lot of really cool ideas can form” (Distal Social Context). Speaking on his goals as an urban educator, Rod discussed the idea of education as liberation, centering the justice-oriented goal of transforming student opportunities to learn science. He reflected, “education as liberation is one of those ideas that I’m trying to interweave and incorporate into everything that I do as an educator... that’s what education should be for” (Goals). In summary, Rod’s pathway into urban science education is based on a series of prior experiences, personal factors, and contextual elements that turned his attention towards science education as a viable pathway. Namely, Rod and his family’s disposition towards the transformative nature of education and his own preoccupation with inequities in both science education and urban schools.

Discussion and Implications

The purpose of this study was to provide a holistic account of the pathways of undergraduate science majors into a secondary science teacher education program for urban schools. The lens of SCCT reveals important insights to how teaching may be made a more or less viable career option for undergraduate science majors over time. Specifically, the general social context in the United States reified scientific research, medicine, and technology, ascribing financial reward and status to these fields, a value that was reinforced in science departments to the exclusion of other pursuits that may reflect individual goals and background experiences. For individuals who did not fit this mold, the career options to be seen as successful in science were limited (Quigley et al., 2024). Findings illustrate the path for undergraduate science majors into teaching, particularly a program on urban education, is a non-linear filled with setbacks, barriers, and a lack of direction because they did not fit this narrow model of a successful science career.

Naming and dismantling the barriers that are particular to the sciences have the potential to develop innovations in recruiting and fostering the growth of more highly qualified and committed urban science educators. Findings are discussed relative to these unique contextual barriers to teaching for undergraduate science majors: 1) prioritizing traditional science careers; 2) devaluing social engagement and activism; and 3) a lack of mentoring and support to individualize career pathways. We discuss these barriers alongside implications for teacher education and higher education create pathways into urban science teaching.

Prioritizing Traditional Science Careers

Findings highlight the centrality of undergraduate science programs in the science teaching career pipeline. Most Scholars began their undergraduate studies with an interest in traditional science careers, but became discouraged, or disenchanted, by narrow career options in research and medicine. Ruth felt pressure to pursue a traditional science career because she was identified as having aptitude in science; Kelsey was resistant to teaching based upon negative stereotypes toward teaching; and Rod became increasingly critical of the inequities in science education. Participant narratives reveal the unique values and pressures of science served as a discouragement for these individuals to pursue teaching, with the culture of science often making difficult for them to “connect the dots” on their path to becoming a teacher. However, as Kelsey explained, Scholars “did not know what else they could do” with a science degree.

This finding aligns with prior research indicating the undergraduate science experience is narrowly designed for the minority of students who will have a science research career in academia or industry (OECD, 2008). The socialization into science begins in K-12 education and is deepened in undergraduate studies (Brint et al., 2008; Plisch, 2015). However, it is likely that the socialization into science is driving out many individuals who may be dissatisfied with their learning experiences and choose to leave science entirely. In fact, these individuals may have the greatest potential to become effective science teachers in urban schools if only their social interest and skills were nurtured and encouraged (Kolovou, 2023; Mensah, 2019), as illustrated in the experiences of Ruth, Kelsey, and Rod.

Thus, findings point to the need to transform the culture of disciplinary departments to acknowledge the humanity of science as a social practice and to encourage and value teaching (Foote & Knaub, 2018; Plisch, 2015). Undergraduate science majors need more opportunities to engage in science-related service-learning in order to take science outside of the university classroom or laboratory into the real world. Working with youth, schools, and communities near the university is a great way for undergraduates to become more socially involved, to foster reciprocity between universities and the community, and to promote student agency in applying course content to address real-world issues of privilege and inequity (Bialka & Havlik, 2016). Engaging in science teaching activities, such as after school science programs, becoming involved in mentoring K-12 students on science fair projects, or working in summer science programs, are possible educational service opportunities cited as meaningful teaching experiences that have been found important to sparking an interest in teaching for science majors (Davis et al., 2006; Luft et al., 2011). Such outreach activities could effectively transform the values of undergraduate science programs and promote both teaching and other socially-oriented roles as viable career pathways (Foote & Knaub, 2018).

Devaluing Social Engagement and Activism

Findings also illustrate a deep commitment among participants to alleviate the inequities in science education in urban schools, thereby contributing to the findings of other literature on Noyce programs (Marco-Bujosa et al., 2020; Olitsky et al., 2020; Whitfield et al., 2021). This social and critical perspective stemmed from direct experience with the inequities in science education, either having personal experience of the inequities, such as the devaluing of science in early educational experiences, like Ruth, or engaging in an afterschool program to empower girls in science, such as Kelsey, or thinking critically about the structure of the undergraduate physics program, as did Rod. As exemplified in the findings, this social justice mission effectively drove Scholars’ career interests in education above and beyond a desire to work with people, or with children, specifically, which is commonly cited in the literature on science teachers (Davis et al., 2006) to attend to structural inequities that limit the opportunities for racially and socioeconomically minoritized students living in urban settings the opportunity to learn and do science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).

Scholars were motivated to overcome the structural inequities they identified in access to high quality educational opportunities, including, but not limited to materials, advanced coursework, accountability pressures in math and English, and a low value of science (Marco-Bujosa et al., 2023; Milner, 2012; See et al., 2020). Currently, this justice-orientation and content expertise to empower urban youth through science is lacking in the science teaching workforce (Kolovou, 2023). Findings indicate there is a potentially untapped pool of applicants who are frustrated by their own experiences as undergraduate science majors may be more likely to apply this critical perspective in their own teaching. With high levels of attrition in undergraduate science majors (Plisch, 2015), it is likely that many potentially strong, critical science educators simply leave the major, and, with them, a prospective science teacher. While findings do not directly address the influence of financial incentives on recruitment, findings support those of other Noyce grantees that while financial incentives are helpful, a desire to work in urban schools and contribute to social change is more prominent (e.g. Olitsky et al., 2020).

Universities should partner more closely with local urban school districts to center teacher education in a community-based approach, preparing educators who are attuned to the unique history, geography, and culture of the city. This community knowledge has been found essential to the design of culturally relevant and place-based science pedagogy (Anderson et al., 2022; Buxton, 2010; Mensah, 2022; Morales-Doyle, 2017), but often lacking for secondary science teachers even when prepared in an urban teacher education program (Marco-Bujosa et al., 2021b). Grow your own teacher education programs also provide promise in ensuring not only commitment to the district and students in the community, but also to provide access to teacher education for racially and geographically underrepresented individuals (Gist, 2022), and provide a unique opportunity to shift the power dynamics in both science teacher education (e.g. Mensah, 2019) and undergraduate science majors (e.g. Author, D) that are essential to making the pathways into science teaching more accessible. Perhaps, in combination with the service-learning efforts, these deep partnerships could form and provide a viable, local pathway to teacher certification.

Insufficient Mentoring and Social Support

Whether it was working an after-school program, being a camp counselor, tutoring, or serving as a teaching assistant, the Scholars’ experiences highlight the central role that social supports played in helping science majors “connect the dots” to science teaching. Despite having prior experience and interest in education or more socially interactive work, teaching or science outreach was not valued as a skill upon which to build a career in the sciences. These supports came from a variety of sources, notably a mentor from the teacher education program, as was the case for Kelsey, engaging directly in outreach with undergraduate science majors, or mentors from within science, as was the case for Ruth. Mentors helped these prospective science educators channel their career outcome expectations and goals into urban science teaching. While mentoring is central to teacher education (Achinstein et al., 2010), findings indicate mentoring is an overlooked but important aspect of the decision to become a science teacher. As illustrated in these cases, early and regular career mentoring, particularly in the pivotal sophomore and junior years when they may start to reconsider their career goals, may be essential to help undergraduate science majors consider other viable careers within science, such as science teaching (Breakall et al., 2021; Logan et al., 2020).

Findings have clear implications for science and education faculty to engage in direct outreach of undergraduate science majors and to be knowledgeable and outwardly supportive of teaching professions. Science faculty and science career advisors should play a role in both identifying students with a potential teaching aptitude and interest, such as those who have served as teaching assistants (Guarino et al., 2006), and advertising science education as a career option more generally in undergraduate science programs. Science faculty could provide time for the teacher education program to visit during class; this outreach strategy would reach a wider array of students. Alternately, science majors could provide career exploration seminars that are co-constructed by science faculty and education faculty. These outreach activities could dispel the stigma against teaching (Breakall et al., 2021; Logan et al., 2020).

Conclusion

The participants in this study are the ones who, despite their frustrations with science, created a pathway to science teaching—there are many other students who do not realize the viability of this pathway. While the factors expressed by participants, such as the isolation and competition, are commonly reported in the literature on the factors leading to student attrition in the science career pipeline (Dewsbury et al., 2019; Marco-Bujosa et al., 2024), the opportunity for recruiting these individuals, who have a rightful and critical perspective on science education, into teaching, and teaching in urban schools in particular, is lost due to barriers in higher education between science departments, education departments, and communities.