Comparing students' engineering and science aspirations from age 10 to 16: Investigating the role of gender, ethnicity, cultural capital, and attitudinal factors

Abstract

Background Women (along with minority ethnic and low-income communities) remain underrepresented in engineering, despite a thirty-year history of research and equality legislation. Compared to the US and other EU countries, this underrepresentation is particularly pronounced in the UK. While existing literature gives insights into factors shaping retention and progression in university engineering students, comparatively less is known about the development of school students' engineering aspirations.Purpose This paper contrasts science and engineering analyses to explore how relationships between background and attitudinal factors and aspirations change across primary and secondary school. We examine the relative influence of gender on aspirations in both science and engineering. Design/MethodWe draw on survey data with over 20,000 English students from the [project name] project. A multilevel regression approach is implemented to test for the effects of gender, ethnicity, and cultural capital on science and engineering aspirations.Results Gender is the main factor related to engineering aspirations while science aspirations are influenced by a broader range of factors. School-level factors become increasingly important for engineering aspirations. We also report evidence of the early distinctiveness of young women who aspire to engineering, in terms of their relatively high self-concept and motivations. ConclusionsThe association of engineering with masculinity is evident in aspirations from age 10 and students aspiring to engineering are distinctive in several respects. Efforts aimed at improving participation in engineering might more usefully focus on challenging the elitist culture and practices, which may influence student perceptions, rather than focusing on changing student aspirations directly.

Science capital or STEM capital? Exploring relationships between science capital and technology, engineering, and maths aspirations and attitudes among young people aged 17/18

“…While this article aimed specifically to investigate contributions of STEM‐related subject attitudes, we accept and acknowledge that other variables will be important to study and include in future modeling analyses to provide a more complete understanding of the multitude of factors relating to student's levels of science capital for this age group. Our ongoing work (Moote et al, , ) has begun to shed light onto this, documenting that gender, ethnicity, and cultural capital, and science self‐concept are important factors that explain a significant proportion of the variance not captured in the current set of analyses. Additionally, further research could explore how these background factors influence the relationship between subject‐specific attitudes and science capital.…”

“…This article reports on students' responses to the following open‐ended survey question as an indicator of post‐18 aspirations, “What best describes the main area of your desired degree/course/subject of study?” Responses were coded into the relevant disciplines by two of the authors. Dichotomous variables were then created (e.g., Physics vs. non‐Physics) and a series of independent‐samples t ‐tests was conducted to compare levels of science capital among various STEM versus non‐STEM university study aspirations, building on the analyses reported in Moote et al (, ). The term “computer science” is used here as this data relates to university study aspirations, with “technology” being a broader discipline.…”

“…As discussed next, our own work has drawn attention to the explanatory power of the concept of science capital with regard to understanding a young person's likelihood of aspiring to continue with science post‐16/18 (see also Cooper & Berry, with regards specifically to students' aspirations to study biology, chemistry, physics and earth sciences). While the ideas have been picked up and applied to understanding young people's choice of studying mathematics at degree level (e.g., Black & Herndandez‐Martinez, ; Choudry, Williams, & Black, ; Williams & Choudry, ), young people's engineering aspirations (Moote et al, ; IMechE, ; Royal Academy of Engineering, ) and technology career aspirations (e.g., Wong & Kemp, ), a comparative analysis of the potential relationship between science capital and young people's aspirations and attitudes with regards to technology, engineering, and mathematics has not been specifically empirically explored to date. Through this article, we contribute to addressing this gap; our analyses indicate that the concept of “STEM capital” can help explain why some students are more likely than others to continue with STEM and can be used to understand, and inform efforts to increase and diversify, aspirations and participation across all STEM disciplines.…”

“Because I’m Not Always Constantly Getting Everything Right”: Gender Differences in Engineering Identity Formation in Elementary Students

“…Godwin and colleagues found that women have similar performance in engineering to boys, but lower confidence in their skills [8]. Moote et al [15] found genderlinked disparities in career aspirations in engineering, positing that this disparity shows how the traditional branding of engineering as masculine is still greatly affecting students' relationships to engineering. Some studies have found instances of gatekeeping in engineering, where young boys try to assert that engineering is not a female space, taking control of projects and not collaborating with female group members [3], [15].…”

“…Moote et al [15] found genderlinked disparities in career aspirations in engineering, positing that this disparity shows how the traditional branding of engineering as masculine is still greatly affecting students' relationships to engineering. Some studies have found instances of gatekeeping in engineering, where young boys try to assert that engineering is not a female space, taking control of projects and not collaborating with female group members [3], [15]. Girls must navigate difficult-to-access, traditionally male spaces, and reconcile performance of engineering and feminine identities, which are considered socially incompatible, in order to construct an engineering identity [15].…”