Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Sociocultural and motivational factors affecting Asian American females studying physics and engineering in high school
(USC Thesis Other)
Sociocultural and motivational factors affecting Asian American females studying physics and engineering in high school
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
SOCIOCULTURAL AND MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS AFFECTING
ASIAN AMERICAN FEMALES STUDYING
PHYSICS AND ENGINEEERING IN HIGH SCHOOL
by
Saliha L. Sha
___________________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2012
Copyright 2012 Saliha L. Sha
ii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Niamatullah Yee-kwun Sa (deceased)
and Chiu-ching A-ishah Ma; especially to my mother, who, in a traditional Asian family,
dared to challenge her husband to let me seek higher education in the U.S. three decades
ago. In order to realize my dream, they had to bear personal loans for years. My
dedication also goes to my students who have inspired me to continue my academic
pursuit in education. In addition, I dedicate this dissertation to my fiancée, Yolanda Ma,
who patiently gave her endless support, encouragement and understanding in the last
three years of the doctorate program. Without her, I would not have the courage to pick
up books and return to campus. Last but not the least, as an atypical Asian Tiger Dad, I
dedicate my dissertation to my daughter, Kaamilah Kai-yan. My concern about her
competitiveness in career search in the 21
st
century has prompted the choice in my
research topic.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My gratitude first goes to my advisement committee chair, Dr. Kimberly
Hirabayashi, for her time, guidance, invaluable insight and unwavering support
throughout the dissertation process. To the members of my advisement committee, Dr.
Dennis Hocevar and Dr. Gisele Ragusa, I would like to express my deepest appreciation
for their supports, insights and critiques. In particular, to Dr. Hocevar, thank you for your
kindness, patience and willingness to assist in the data analysis for this study.
I would like to convey my gratitude to the two assistant superintendents for their
firm supports in providing me with permission to conduct research in their school
districts. To the principals, for their cooperation and rapports, as well as to the physics
teachers, who went beyond expected to make the student survey successful and
meaningful. I would not have expressed enough for my appreciation and gratitude to all
the student participants and their genuine comments to me and the survey.
A very special thanks to my mother, sisters, fiancée and daughter whose generous
and unwavering support was an essential motivation during the three-year process of my
doctorate program. And to Mr. King, whose made-to-order frozen dumplings became the
vital dish easing my hunger through the busiest days in my life. Finally, I humbly
prostrate before God (SWT) for His will to allow the completion of my doctorate
program with strength and health He provides.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vii
Abstract ix
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Problem 2
Statement of the Problem 7
The Purpose of the Study 8
Research Questions 9
Significance of the Study 10
Methodology 11
Assumptions 12
Definition of Terms 12
Organization of the Study 13
Chapter 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 15
A Prediction of Shortage of Physics Scientists and Engineers in
Our Nations 16
Reasons of Low Supply of Physical Scientists and Engineers 18
Dropout Rates in STEM Fields 20
An Underrepresentation of Females in STEM Fields 21
Leakage of the Pipeline: The Severity of Female
Underrepresentation 21
Solutions to the Shortage of STEM Workers 23
Academic Preparation in K-12 for Physics and Engineering 25
Expectancy-related and Value-related Beliefs Influence Course
Enrollment Decisions, College Major Selection, and Career Choices 26
Preparation in Mathematics for Physics and Engineering 27
Motivational Barriers Faced by Female Physics and
Engineering Students 28
Motivational Barriers Faced by Females from Early
Childhood to Adolescence 30
Female Students’ Task Values Determine Their Course
Choices 32
Female Students’ Self-Efficacy Determine Their Course
Choices 36
Acculturation and Enculturation Affect Asian American Students’
v
Achievement and Course-taking Choices 45
Bidimensional Acculturation 45
Development of AAMAS 46
Acculturation and Asian Americans 46
Acculturation/Enculturation Difference Between
Generations and Between Genders 47
Conclusion 48
Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY 50
Research Questions 50
Research Design 51
Participants and Setting 52
Implementation 54
Physics Self-Efficacy 55
Acculturation and Enculturation 56
Expectancy for Success, Intrinsic Interest Value,
Attainment Value, and Extrinsic Utility Value 57
10-Week Fall Semester Grade 58
Gender, Ethnicity, and Generational Status 58
Parents’ Highest Education Level 59
Reason for Taking This Physics Course 60
Data Collection Procedures 60
Data Analysis 62
Research Question One 62
Research Question Two 63
Research Question Three 63
Research Question Four 64
Limitations 64
Delimitations 65
Chapter 4: RESULTS 67
Descriptive Statistics 67
Research Question One 74
Research Question Two 76
Research Question Three 78
Research Question Four 80
Chapter 5: DISCUSSION 84
Summary of Study’s Findings 86
Frequency and Correlation Matrix Analysis 86
Effects on Expectancy-valued Beliefs, Achievement,
Acculturation/Enculturation 88
Effects on Intended College Major and Planned Career Choice 89
vi
Gender Effect on Expectancy-related Beliefs in Physics and
Choice of Future Plan’s Findings 90
Ethnicity Has No Effect on Achievement, Expectancy-value
Related Beliefs in Physics and Choice of Future Plans 92
Effect of Immigration Status on Self-efficacy in Physics as well as
Acculturation and Enculturation 94
Parental Educational Level of an Asian American Student Has
Effect On Achievement, Expectancy for Success and Acculturation 96
Implications for Research and Practitioners 98
Implications for Research 98
Implications for Practitioners and Stakeholders 99
Recommendations for Future Research 103
Conclusions 105
References 107
Appendices 116
Appendix A: Demographics Questions and Measurement Scales 116
Appendix B: Parental Consent Form 124
Appendix C: Youth Assent Form 128
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Demographic Information by School 52
Table 2: Physics Students’ Demographic Information by Ethnicity and
Gender 53
Table 3: Results of the Reliability Calculations Concerning PSES,
AAMAS, and Self- and Task-Perception Questionnaire 56
Table 4: Reason for Taking This Physics Course 60
Table 5: Generational Status of Asian Students 67
Table 6: Participants by Ethnicity 68
Table 7: Frequency Distribution of Students’ Proximal Goal to Take
a Physics Course 68
Table 8: Means, Standard Deviations, Computed and Referenced
Cronbach's Reliability Coefficients 69
Table 9: Intercorrelation Matrix Between Achievement, Intended
College Major, Planned career choice, and Parental Education
Level, Expectancy-related and Value-related Variables for All
Participants 70
Table 10: Intercorrelation Matrix Between Achievement, Intended
College Major, Planned career choice, Expectancy-related
and Value-related Variables for Male and Female Participants 72
Table 11: T-test for Gender on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs,
and Value-related Beliefs 75
Table 12: Chi-square Test for Gender on Intended College Major and
Planned Career choice 75
Table 13: T-test for ethnicity on Achievement, Expectancy-related
Beliefs, and Value-related Beliefs 76
Table 14: Chi-square Test for ethnicity on Intended College Major and
Planned Career Choice 77
Table 15: T-test for Chinese vs Non-Chinese Among Asian American
viii
Students on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs, and
Value-related Beliefs 77
Table 16: Chi-square test for Chinese vs Non-Chinese Among Asian
American Students on Intended College Major and Planned
Career Choice 77
Table 17: T-test for Immigration Status Among Asian American
Students on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs, and
Value-related Beliefs 79
Table 18: Chi-square test for Immigration Status Among Asian
American Students on Intended College Major and Planned
Career Choice 79
Table 19: T-test for Parental Education Level Among Asian American
Students on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs, and
Value-related Beliefs 81
Table 20: Chi-square test for Parental Education Level Among Asian
American Students on Intended College Major and Planned
Career Choice 81
Table 21: T-test for Paternal and Maternal Education Level Among
Asian American Students on Achievement, Expectancy-related
Beliefs, and Value-related Beliefs 82
Table 22: Chi-square test for Paternal and Maternal Education Level
Among Asian American Students on Intended College Major
and Planned Career Choice 83
ix
ABSTRACT
This quantitative study investigated whether and to what extent the motivational
and sociocultural factors affect female Asian American high school physics students’
achievement, their intended major in college, and their planned career goals at work
fields. A survey of 62 questions, extracted from subscales of AAMAS,STPQ and PSE,
were conducted with 274 high school physics students in an effort to better inform
current academic practitioners how to better serve this population. Correlational matrix,
t-tests and chi-square tests were used for data analysis. A main effect of gender was
found on expectancy-related beliefs, choice of intended college major and planned career
choice. A significant effect for Asian American students of different immigration status
was also found on their physics self-efficacy, acculturation and enculturation. Parental
educational levels also have a main effect on Asian American physics students’
expectancy for success, acculturation and achievement. However, there was no ethnicity
effect found between Asian American and non-Asian American students. It is in the hope
that these findings can provide a deeper insight in understanding the motivational and
sociocultural factors that affect female Asian American high schoolers in order to
enhance their higher interests and participation rate in physics as well as to increase the
headcount to study and work in physics and engineering fields.
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Female engineering students at college and female workers at science and
engineering (S&E) workplaces are underrepresented. In 2006, the science and
engineering workforce in the U.S. was largely white (73%) and male (74%) (National
Science Foundation [NSF], 2011). In academia, while both genders have fairly reached
equal number entering colleges in the last two decades, the number of female students
majoring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is still at a low
count (Becker, 2010). For instance, in 2007, while percentages of women undergraduates
enrolled in pharmaceutics, biology, mathematics, and chemistry were all above 45% of
the total enrollment, their percentages in civil engineering, industrial engineering,
physics/astronomy, and electrical engineering held steadily below 25% (Becker, 2010).
Once the word “engineering” mentioned in the major, female students immediately
interpret that those fields are for males only (Becker, 2010).
Low enrollment in engineering at college could find its roots back to the students’
preparation from grade schools (Lindsay & Salzman, 2007; NAS, 2007; Norman, 2007).
Past studies suggested that persistence rates in STEM field by gender are affected by
academic preparation (Ehrenberg, 2010; Griffith, 2011; Price, 2011). However, this
deficit in preparation is not necessarily due to intelligence by gender. In fact, the
performance gap is mainly due to self-concepts; there is a widely dispersed belief of male
mathematical superiority deep down in the U.S. culture (Correll, 2001).
Based on Eccles’ (1994, 2005) expectancy-value model of achievement-related
choices, socialization processes linked to gender plays a critical role for math-related
2
ability self-concept, and in turn, this self-concept mediates the relationship between
gender stereotypes and math gender gap. In addition, self-efficacy acts as an active
precursor of self-concept development (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). Therefore, lack of self-
efficacy due to mastery experience in mathematics leads female students to avoid taking
advanced mathematics courses and mathematics-related subjects, such as physics and
engineering. Consequently, these self-doubts affect young women, even with good grades
in mathematics and science, in imagining themselves successfully studying engineering
(Becker, 2010).
Background of the Problem
Since America is now losing its lead in many key technological areas and its
standard of living is based upon science and technology innovations (Brown, 2009), it is
important to keep up the technological edges and recruit the most talented Americans,
males and females, to join the science and engineering development. However, the truth
is that there is a decline in number of American youths entering science, engineering,
technical and mathematics (STEM) work fields (National Academy of Sciences [NAS],
2007). Thirty years ago, the United States ranked third in the percentage of university
science and engineering graduates; nonetheless, by 2006, its rank has dropped to 17
th
place. To be specific, in the last two decades, the U.S. had an 18 % decline in
engineering, mathematics, and physical and geosciences bachelor’s degree completion
and a 40 % decline in the proportion of students studying these subjects in college.
Past studies enlisted three possible reasons why there is a low supply of scientists
and engineers from the younger generations (Brown, 2009; NAS, 2007; Norman, 2007).
3
The reasons are the unwillingness of young people to pursue science and engineering
fields, the high dropout rates in STEM fields, and the persistent underrepresentation of
women in STEM fields, particularly, in physics and engineering programs (Becker,
2010).
A review of the literature has suggested several possible solutions to ameliorate
the shortage in STEM fields (Hewlett et al., 2008; Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers – USA [IEEE], 2010; NAS, 2007). Among the suggestions, one solution
involves changes in the earlier stages of the supply pipeline of STEM workers by
increasing the number of U.S. youths, especially of the underrepresented groups of
women and minorities, in entering the STEM fields (Hunt, 2010). In the view that current
percentage of females majoring in physics and engineering has held steadily below 25%
(Becker, 2010) and there is only one female out of every ten engineers at the work place
(NSF, 2011), it is convincing to tap into the rank of female students as a potential source
for replenishing shortage of the STEM workers.
In order to recruit more female students to join the STEM field, an investigation
into why female students have low interests in math-intensive subjects is needed. A
literature review on females from their elementary school years to their years at work in
STEM fields has been conducted (Adelman, 1998; Ayalon, 2003; Becker, 2010; Britner
& Pajares, 2006; Bong & Skaalvik, 2003; Concannon & Barrow, 2009; Correll, 2001;
Eccles, 1994, 2005; Ehrenberg, 2010; Griffith, 2010; Hazari, Sonnert, Sadler, &
Shanahan, 2010; Hunt, 2010; Jones, Paretti, Hein, & Knott, 2010; Lindsay & Salzman,
2007; Norman, 2007; Ost, 2011; Price, 2011; Steffens, Jelenec, & Noack, 2010; Stout et
4
al., 2011, Zhu, 2007). For instance, past studies showed that the persistence rate in STEM
fields for women is much lower than those in non-STEM fields for women, and is
relatively behind when compared to the persistence rate in STEM fields for men
(Ehrenberg, 2010; Griffith, 2010). Fair compensation, promotion prospects, support,
networking, and modeling from expert peers (Hunt, 2010; Griffith, 2010) are a few
factors that impose a negative effect on women’s motivation to persist in STEM work
fields. These unsatisfactory conditions at workplace send a hurtful message to the
females studying STEM majors. In addition, other messages female students receive from
parents, teachers, professors, and peers in both K-12 and postsecondary settings
discourage them from pursuing math-intensive and physics-related degrees in college
(Becker, 2010; Stout et al., 2011). It is not surprising to find that the retention rate for
female in undergraduate engineering programs is about 40%, which is a sharp 20% lower
than the rate for males (Adelman, 1998; Concannon & Barrow, 2009). Overall, less than
one third of female college students in the U.S. enter math-intensive fields such as
engineering and computer science (Steffens et al., 2010).
Low enrollment in engineering at college could find its roots back to the students’
preparation in their grade schools (Lindsay & Salzman, 2007; NAS, 2007; Norman,
2007). Griffith (2011) pointed out that lower grades lead to lower persistence, and
particularly, this relationship has a stronger effect on women. Subsequently, the severity
for persistence in female students major in physics and engineering depends upon the
number of courses, the difficulty levels, the course grades in mathematics and high
school physics, the pre-college preparation, such as taking AP Calculus and AP Physics
5
classes and exams, and performance in open examinations such as scoring in SAT
mathematics (Griffith, 2011; Ost, 2011; Price, 2011).
Note that a successful preparation and transition to major in physics or
engineering at college requires a strong background in mathematics skills. A strong
mathematical background increases the tendency of both genders to choose sciences,
business, and economics (Ayalon, 2003). However, even at the elementary grades, there
already exists a gender gap in mathematics performance (Eccles, 1994, 2005). Capability
is not the reason though; the gap in performance is largely due to the belief of male
mathematical superiority in our culture (Correll, 2001). Furthermore, since self-efficacy
acts as an active precursor of self-concept development (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003), lack of
self-efficacy due to mastery experience in mathematics leads female students avoid
taking further mathematics courses as well as mathematics-related subjects, such as
physics and engineering. Consequently, these self-doubts affect young women, even with
good grades in mathematics and science, in perceiving they will be successful in
engineering (Becker, 2010).
However, having good grades in mathematics does not mean students will choose
studying physics or engineering in college. Hazari et al. (2010) purported that students’
eighth grade career interests in science predict better their future chances of receiving a
bachelor’s degree in sciences than students’ eighth grade mathematics achievement.
Moreover, in order to initiate and maintain motivation in studying physics and
engineering in college, it is recommended to take introductory physics at high school
(Griffith, 2011; Price, 2011; Ost, 2011), and in turn, a positive mastery experience in
6
physics performance will enhance students’ physics self-efficacy (PSE). PSE, which is
one of the most significant predictors of motivation to engage in studying physics and
engineering (Zhu, 2007), strongly predicts students’ future achievement in physics
(Britner & Pajares, 2006), and students will be more likely to study in physics or
engineering eventually.
Meanwhile, Wigfield and Eccles’s (2002) expectancy-value theory suggests that
value relates strongly to choice; in fact, even young females who have good grades in
mathematics and science, they do not value science and mathematics as much as young
males do (Becker, 2010; Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2010). Past study suggested that
expectancy-related beliefs serve as a good predictor for students’ achievement while
value-related constructs predict career plan better among first-year engineering
undergraduates of both gender (Jones et al., 2010).
Searching through past literature, many studies were only focused on Caucasian
students or other major minority groups namely, African American and Hispanic
American; there were fewer studies on Asian American. Therefore, a study on female
Asian American students’ sociocultural factors affecting their performance and choice in
studying physics and engineering will contribute to past literature. In particular, it is
important to examine within-group individual differences rather than between-group
differences in order to explain the linkage between minority students’ motivational
beliefs about competence and their actual achievement (Schunk et al., 2010).
7
Statement of the Problem
The problem the present study aims to address is whether and to what extent
female Asian American students’ expectancy-related beliefs, value-related beliefs, as
well as their acculturation and enculturation affect their performance, choice of study,
and choice of career in physics and engineering. As discussed, the underrepresentation of
females in physics and engineering both in college and at workplace is omnipresent. The
problem can finds its roots originated to students’ K-12 schoolings (Becker, 2010;
Brown, 2009; Eccles, 1994, 2005; Ehrenberg, 2010; Griffith, 2011; Hewlett et al., 2008;
Lindsay & Salzman, 2007; NAS, 2007; Norman, 2007; Price, 2011). Since the
elementary grades, there already exists a gender gap in mathematics performance (Eccles,
1994, 2005). At the one end along the lifespan of K-16 students, students’ choices of
major in college and career at work are not solidified until they enter middle school age
(Hazari et al., 2010). However, at the other end, engineering courses have sequential
course requirements of high-level mathematics (multi-variables calculus and linear
algebra) and college level physics (mechanics, thermodynamics, sound and optics,
electricity and magnetism, and modern physics). Therefore, there will be a time gap for
students in high school who are interested in engineering as a potential college major but
cannot find compatible high school elective courses to experience the true engineering
curriculum. In turn, when considering college applications, students can only make their
intended major of study in physics or engineering based upon their achievement and
experience in high school physics. In view of this, the present study will be focused on
8
the experience of high school female students in taking physics as a high school science
elective at a time when interests in science and free choice of course-taking first meet.
Moreover, there is a lack of understanding about how expectancy-related beliefs
and value-related beliefs are related to high school female student’s performance,
intended choice of study in college, and choice of career. To date, there are only few past
studies about females’ expectancy-related and value-related beliefs in physics conducted
at high school level (Eccles, 2009; Eccles & Wigfield, 1995; Wigfield & Eccles, 2002).
Due to this lack of understanding, it is difficult to offer suggestions to administrators and
counselors on proper intervention or resources allocation in preparing female students
majoring and working in physics and engineering. Furthermore, as past studies showed
that Caucasian and Asian American students are usually found to be better performing
students in physics and engineering (NSF, 2011), there has been a notable shortage of
research to study on the acculturation and enculturation effects on Asian American
females in physics and engineering majors, as female students have been conventionally
underrepresented in the majors and at workplace as a whole.
The Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether and to what extent the
motivational and sociocultural factors affect female high school students’ choices of
course-taking at high school, their intended major in college, and their intended career
goals at work fields. In particular, it serves fourfold. First, it is to examine whether and
to what extent the gender of the students relates to their physics expectancy-related
beliefs (expectancy for success and self-efficacy), value-related beliefs (intrinsic interests
9
value, attainment value, and extrinsic utility value), achievement, persistence, as well as
plans in studying in physics or engineering majors and working in physics and
engineering fields. Second, the study examines whether and to what extent the ethnicity
of high school students relates to their physics expectancy-related beliefs, value-related
beliefs, achievement, as well as plans in studying in physics or engineering majors and
working in physics and engineering fields. Third, among Asian American students, the
study examines whether and to what extent their generational status in the K-12
schoolings relates to their acculturation, enculturation, achievement, as well as plans in
studying in physics or engineering majors and working in physics and engineering fields.
Lastly, since Asian American students are the only minority who perform better in
physics and engineering as a group besides Caucasian majority (NSF, 2011), the study
examines whether and to what extent their parental education level relates to Asian
American students’ acculturation, enculturation, achievement, as well as plans in
studying in physics or engineering majors and working in physics and engineering fields.
Research Questions
The study aims to answer four research questions. The questions are:
1) Do male and female high school physics students differ with respect to their self-
efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic
utility value, achievement, intended college major and career choice?
2) Do Asian American and non-Asian American high school physics students differ
with respect to their self-efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value,
10
attainment value, extrinsic utility value, achievement, intended college major and
career choice?
3) Does the immigration status of an Asian American high school student differ with
respect to their acculturation/enculturation, self-efficacy, success expectancies,
intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, achievement,
college major and career choice?
4) Does the parental education level of an Asian American high school student differ
with respect to their acculturation/enculturation, self-efficacy, success
expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value,
achievement, college major and career choice?
Significance of the Study
The major goal of the current study replicates the previous findings on
expectancy-related and value-related beliefs in the domain of physics among female
students at high school level. A secondary objective serves to extend the past findings on
the acculturation and enculturation effects on Asian American females in the choice of
studying in physics and engineering fields. Moreover, the present study contributes to the
past research in determining the predictability of motivational construct, such as self-
efficacy, expectancy for success, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, as well as
extrinsic utility value, and sociocultural construct, such as acculturation and
enculturation, in female high school students’ plan of studying and working in physics or
engineering. In such way that research scholar, policy makers, and other academic
stakeholders will be able to find intervention in designing better-aligned mathematics and
11
science curriculum to enrich female students’ academic pursuit in physics and
engineering at high school level and in enhancing the retention for female physics and
engineering students at college. Furthermore, engaging more underrepresented female
and minority students in learning science, particularly physics, could not only increase
the talent pool but also lead to more equitable economic opportunities, wider utilization
of science understandings in our daily lives, and newer insights in the practice and
teaching of science.
Methodology
In the current study, an explanatory nonexperimental design was used to assess
the effect of senior high school students’ expectancy-related beliefs, value-related beliefs,
and acculturation/enculturation on their achievement in physics, choice of studying
physics or engineering as a major in college, and intended career related to physics or
engineering. The design was in self-report format, mostly in Likert-type scale, consisting
of various measurements on independent and dependent variables. The sampling
population was high school students taking any level of high school physics classes, and
data collection for this study took after ten weeks of Fall semester and lasted
approximately 30 minutes.
Using quantitative inquiry methods, such as, t-tests and chi-square tests, the
purpose of the present study is to examine whether students’ gender and ethnicity differ
in their achievement, intended major choice and career selection, and to look into the
correlations of their motivational beliefs, such as, expectancy for success, various types
of values, as well as self-efficacy, with these intended academic outcomes. In addition,
12
using t-tests and chi-square tests statistics, the present study examines among Asian
American students whether their generational status and parental educational level predict
achievement, intended major choice and career selection.
Assumptions
For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that sampling subjects would respond
honestly to the survey questions, such that the sampling subjects, that is, high school
students whom the present study was conducted upon would not be subject to invasion of
their privacy, self-incrimination, nor unfair discrimination. The data collected will not be
used or shared other than the statistical analysis prescribed in the study. The present
research also takes the assumption that the motivational and sociocultural problems under
investigation can be understood and solved with knowledge. Furthermore, the self-report
survey has been able to act as a meaningful measurement tool to answer the research
questions properly.
Definition of Terms
The variables in this study are: expectancy for success, intrinsic interest value,
attainment value, extrinsic utility value, self-efficacy, acculturation, enculturation, reason
to take a high school physics course, gender, generational status and parents’ highest
education level. In addition, questions on students’ 10-week Fall semester grade, intended
college major, and planned career choice have also been surveyed. A brief definition of
each of the motional and sociocultural variables has been summarized below.
Acculturation and enculturation. A process of adhering to the values and
behaviors of the host culture and home culture that a minority individual experiences.
13
Asian. Asian mentioned in this study refers to Asian American high school
students who were either U.S. born or foreign born.
Expectancy for success. Beliefs of students that they will do well in a specific
domain.
Intended college major. A major that a student intends to study in college.
Planned career choice. A profession in which a student intends to work after
college graduation.
Self-concept. Perceptions of students about themselves in the domain of physics.
Self-efficacy. Beliefs of students that they are capable to perform tasks in physics.
Value – intrinsic interest. Enjoyment students experience when performing a
task in physics.
Value – attainment. The importance of doing well on a task in physics.
Value – extrinsic utility. The usefulness of completing a task in physics.
Organization of the Study
Chapter one of the present study has presented a brief introduction and
background to the problems relating to female students’ motivational and sociocultural
factors to choose studying and working in physics and engineering. Chapter two is a
literature review on the related topics of the present study. The review includes the
following main topics: 1) A prediction of shortage of physical scientists and engineers in
our nation; 2) An underrepresentation of females in STEM fields; 3) Expectancy-related
and value-related beliefs influence course enrollment decisions, college major selection,
14
and career choices; 4) Acculturation and enculturation affect Asian American students’
achievement and course-taking choices. These topics will be reviewed and further
synthesized in order to generate a guideline for the research questions of this study.
Chapter three presents the methodology utilized in the current study including the
research design, participants and setting, sample procedures, instrumentation, and data
collection procedures. It also discusses the analytic framework, as well as threats to
reliability and validity as well as limitations of the present study. Chapter four presents
the results collected for the present investigation. Finally, chapter five includes a
discussion of the main findings, implications for research and practice, and
recommendations for future research as well as conclusion.
15
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Even though both genders have reached fairly equal number entering colleges in
the last two decades in the wake of social equity in education and workplace for both
gender, the number of female students majoring in physics and engineering is still at a
low count (Miller, Blessing, & Schwartz, 2006; Stake, 2006; Taasoobshirazi & Carr,
2008). Research shows that the low enrollment in physics and engineering as a college
major is due to the issue that many female high school students do not consider physics
or engineering as a career choice (Amelink & Creamer, 2010; Stout, Dasgupta,
Hunsinger, & McManus, 2011). This chapter will explore the literature relating to the
sociocultural and motivational factors that determine the choice of female students at
high school in studying physics and, eventually, continue majoring in science and
engineering at college. In particular, this review will explore literature in the following
areas: 1) In spite of a shortage in physicists and engineers in our nation, there is still an
underrepresentation of females in the work field; 2) the sociocultural and motivational
barriers that female students studying physics and engineering face; 3) the determinants
of self-efficacy and expectancy-value related factors that determine female students’
choices of course-taking in physics, college major and career path in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM); and 4) the acculturational and enculturational
influence that affect the course-taking, college major and career choices of the Asian
American students at high school. Lastly, this review will explore the gender difference
in students’ physics self-efficacy, success expectancy and values in physics, as well as
16
acculturational/enculturationl influence on their choice of physics course-taking at high
school in their preparation for majoring in physics or engineering at college.
A Prediction of Shortage of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Our Nation
A recent study from National Academy of Sciences ([NAS], 2007) warned that
the United States is losing its competitiveness because of a decline in number of
American youths entering STEM work fields. This trend of decline predicts existing and
forthcoming shortages in filling the openings of STEM workers (Ehrenberg, 2010). In
particular, Atkinson (1990) predicted a significant shortfall of natural scientists and
physical engineers between supply and demand for the next several decades at both the
baccalaureate and Ph.D. levels. Further, such decline has progressively escalated to an
alarming level over the last three decades (National Research Council [NRC], 2000; Vest,
2006).
The shortage of STEM workers, especially physics scientists and engineers,
actually went beyond the concern of filling jobs in the STEM pipeline. In fact, Brown
(2009) stated that America’s standard of living is based on science and technology
innovations and that our nation is now perilously losing its lead in many key
technological areas. While, 30 years ago, the United States ranked third in the percentage
of university science and engineering graduates, by 2006, the rank has dropped to 17
th
place. Reporting on the human assets as an indicator of technological advances,
Augustine (2007) noted that Asia graduated 636,000 new engineers in 2002, compared
with only 68,600 in the U.S. within the same year. In the last two decades, the U.S. had
an 18% decline in engineering, math, and physical and geosciences bachelor’s degree
17
completion and a 40% decline in the proportion of students studying these subjects in
college.
When summing up the numbers of all types of STEM workers, the decline in the
supply of particular types of STEM workers is not easily noticed. According to the
Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology [CPST] (2009), the number of
information technology (IT) workers, for instance, has increased from 646,000 in 1980 to
3.3 million in 2000. The surge in IT workers was mainly due to the wider spread of IT
application in various types of industries and the popularized usage of computers in
American households. However, the possible cash in dot.com stock options in 1990s
made an unhealthy slide of a large spool of highly capable STEM students to the IT
fields. This slide depleted the labor supply to the more fundamental science and
engineering fields in which math skills and physics knowledge are intensively involved
but less monetarily rewarded at the entry levels (Brown 2009).
In addition, Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) reported a shortfall
of 10%- 15% experienced engineers in 2010 (Patel, Bohorquez, & Scott, 2007). More
than half the petroprofessionals are less than 10 years away from their retirement (Rajan
& Krome, 2008), and a recently graduated petroleum engineer could easily find a higher
starting salary than an Ivy League graduate going to finance on Wall Street (Yergin,
2008).
Meanwhile, conflicting claims backed up by convincing statistics suggested that
there were no shortages of scientists and engineers found in the U.S. The total U.S.
STEM work force at 4.8 million was roughly one-third of the 15.7 million workers who
18
held at least one science or engineering degree (Lowell & Salzman, 2007). It suggested
that the labor supply in STEM fields has outgrown the net demand by three times.
Therefore, there is no labor shortage in STEM work fields. In addition, even before the
US economy breakdown that began in 2008, the data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(Teitelaum, 2003) posted surprisingly high unemployment rates in science and
engineering fields with an average rate of 4.4% from a range between 2.8 and 7.5 %,
compared to about 6% for the entire U.S. workforce during the same period.
The juxtaposition of supporting as well as disproving data about STEM worker
shortage proclaimed by the government, academia, and companies extended a distinction
between a shortage in the conventional sense and the hiring difficulties in matching the
supply and demand at the work fields. Even worse, reports published by industry
associations having strong political support for their lobbying campaign needs (Brown,
2009; Teitelaum, 2003); their putative projections of existing and forthcoming shortages
often blurred the authentic shortage claims on certain STEM fields, such as engineering,
which were supported by quantitative evidence (Brown, 2009; Teitelaum, 2003).
Reasons of Low Supply of Physical Scientists and Engineers
In order to debunk the myth about no worker shortage in STEM fields, past
studies enlisted the possible reasons why there is a low supply of scientists and engineers
from the younger generations (Brown, 2009; NAS, 2007; Norman, 2007). The reasons
are the unwillingness of young people to pursue science and engineering fields, the high
dropout rates in STEM fields, and the persistent underrepresentation of women in STEM
fields, particularly, in physics and engineering programs (Becker, 2010). These three
19
reasons can be categorized by their motivational, sociocultural, and societal factors
behind. Past studies suggested looking into the value factors that prevent young people
from selecting physics and engineering majors. First, after the dissolution of USSR, the
inspiration by the race into space in the heart of the American youths was long gone.
Generation Y and later perceive that the U.S. is subject to a lower degree of national
threat in terms of technology than three decades ago (Lindsay & Salzman, 2007).
Today’s young people in the developed countries have lost the link between technology
innovation and living standards improvement. This young generation is fascinated by
hands-on technology but is not motivated to ponder the laden and abstract theory behind
the scientific advancement (Becker, 2010).
Second, as far as salary and compensation concerned, there are many reasons
young people do not find the STEM fields as attractive as other career paths. In
particular, STEM fields lack promising payoffs compared to other fields such as law,
accounting and finance (Becker, 2010; Brown, 2009). For instance, Teitelaum (2003)
pointed out that many professional careers in science fields required the completion of
the doctoral degrees, and half of all PhDs conferred in the natural sciences are in
biosciences. In many cases, students and their families in biosciences need to cumulate a
substantial financial burden for a college study path that sometimes extends to nine to
twelve years. The opportunity costs for piling up student loans and losing a substantial
fraction of lifetime turn down many capable would-be bioscientists. Meanwhile, studying
for other STEM fields may involve less in both tangible student loans and intangible loss
in income. In fact, for engineering, the bachelor degree would normally earn the students
20
an entry ticket into the profession in which average annual salaries between 1995 and
2005 were more than $70,000 (Brown, 2009; Teitelaum, 2003). Nonetheless, many
competition-oriented students who have good grades in science and mathematics prefer
careers in insurance and consulting, where higher potential monetary rewards and better
promotion opportunities could be found (Becker, 2010).
Dropout Rates in STEM Fields
When considering the factors behind the high dropout rates in STEM fields, the
H-1B temp work visa and outsourcing also serve as one reason as well since
undergraduates change their mind to switch to other majors of which the starting salary
ranges are more attractive (Brown, 2009). Moreover, unlike other majors, the loss in
numbers of dropouts from engineering programs is not easily replaced as the nested and
sequential engineering curricula are not usually compatible to the programs of other
majors (Concannon & Barrow, 2009). Once the students switch out, it will be extremely
difficult to recruit a new group of students who have a similar background of
mathematics and science coursework to replenish the loss.
In addition, Atkinson (1990) also pointed out one special kind of dropout in
engineering field. As most jobs in engineering require only finishing the baccalaureate
level, the shortage in Ph. D. candidates has been further depleted by those employers who
offer high compensation to attract the brightest engineering students entering the STEM
fields sooner. This, in turn, would slow down the global competitiveness of our nation
(Augustine, 2007).
21
In summary from the above fact findings, the U.S. job market has a shortage for
STEM positions. However, due to the current corporate trends which are supported by
the U.S. government policies, the voice of demand has been much quieted down by
hiring temporary foreign workers instead of increasing the number of highly qualified
high school graduates with sufficiently strong preparation for majoring in STEM fields at
college (Ehrenberg, 2010). This societal factor forms an implicit compensation ceiling in
STEM fields, increases unnecessary job competition among the U. S. nationals, and
contributes a major extrinsic reason why the U. S. youths are not motivated to enter the
STEM fields and why the STEM students and workers switch out from the supply
pipeline.
An Underrepresentation of Females in STEM Fields
Leakage of the Pipeline - The Severity of Female Underrepresentation
Over the past several decades, the ratio between male and female students
graduated from four-year colleges in our nation has had a dramatic change. For each
female graduated from four-year colleges in 1960, there were 1.6 male graduates. By
2003, this number was reversed to every four female graduates for every three male
graduates from four-year colleges (Goldin, Katz, & Kuziemo, 2006). In particular, in
1970, of combined medicine, dentistry, and law degree holders, only 9% were female
students. By 2000, 47% of full time and 44% of part-time students pursuing the three
degrees were female (Freeman, 2004).
Although there has been a tremendous female graduate increment in biological
sciences and medicine (Freeman, 2004), the underrepresentation of women in other
22
science majors, particularly, in engineering and physical science, is still a significant and
a well-documented societal concern (Miller et al., 2006; Stake, 2006; Taasoobshirazi &
Carr, 2008). In 2009, while women exceeded more than half of those employed in
professional, managerial and related occupations, females remain underrepresented in the
engineering profession comprising only 10% of the engineer population (Buse, 2011;
NSF, 2011). A great deal of research was conducted on the issue, and hefty funds were
spent on intervention programs to increase female participation (May & Chubin, 2003).
Nonetheless, limited progress has been made. For instance, while there was a tremendous
increment in females’ enrollment in bachelor’s degree programs in engineering from 3%
in the late 1970s to about 18% by the 1990s (Eccles, 2007), the increment percentage
remained in low 20s in the last decade. To be specific, in 2007, while percentages of
women undergraduates enrolled in pharmaceutics, biology, mathematics, and chemistry
were all above 45% of the total enrollment, their percentages in civil engineering,
industrial engineering, physics/astronomy, and electrical engineering were still below
25% (Becker, 2010). Once the word “engineering” mentioned in the major, female
students right away interpret that those fields are for males only (Becker, 2010). Even
worse, the retention rate for female in undergraduate engineering programs was only
about 40%, compared to 60% of the rate for male (Adelman, 1998; Concannon &
Barrow, 2009). Overall, less than one third of female college students in the U.S. enter
math-intensive fields such as engineering and computer science (Steffens et al., 2010).
The disappointing situation is not any better at graduate level. In 2004, for every two
23
male master’s degree holders in computer science, there was only one female. For
master’s degrees in either physics or engineering, only 21% were female (NSF, 2004).
Past studies reflected that the persistence rate in STEM fields for women is much
lower than those in non-STEM fields for women, and is relatively behind when compared
to the persistence rate in STEM fields for men (Ehrenberg, 2010; Griffith, 2010). Hunt
(2010) found that 60% of the differential gender gap in dropout rates of female workers
exit from engineering is dissatisfaction over compensation and promotion opportunities,
and suggested that it is a leaky joint in the STEM pipeline for women workers. A
literature review also found that there were many noticeable factors why female STEM
workers changed their jobs and female STEM students switched to other majors. Fair
compensation and promotion prospects, support, networking, and modeling from expert
peers (Griffith, 2010; Hunt, 2010) were a few factors that imposed a negative effect on
women’s motivation to study in STEM majors and persist in STEM work fields.
Solutions to the Shortage of STEM Workers
In this section, the third reason why there is a low supply of scientists and
engineers from the younger generations – the persistent underrepresentation of women in
STEM fields, particularly, in physics and engineering programs (Becker, 2010; Brown,
2009; NAS, 2007; Norman, 2007) – will be discussed. Policy analysts and scholars have
pointed out that the imminent decline in number of American youths entering STEM
fields at the workplace would lose the global competitiveness of our nation (Atkinson,
1990; Augustine, 2007; Brown, 2009; Ehrenberg, 2010; Gates, 2007; Griswold, 1998;
NAS, 2006; National Research Council, 2000; Vest, 2006). The first two of the three
24
possible reasons, that is, unwillingness of young people to pursue science and
engineering fields and the high dropout rates in STEM fields, have been presented in the
last section.
In order to ameliorate the shortage in STEM fields, there are three possible
solutions enlisted in the past studies (Hewlett et al., 2008; IEEE, 2010; NAS, 2006). The
first solution is to increase the skilled foreign nationals under the H-1B visa program
working in the U.S. (Brown, 2009; Gates, 2007; Griswold, 1998). This argument has
already been presented in the last section that while it seems to be a practical solution
since skilled immigrants disproportionately specialize in science and engineering fields
(Hunt, 2010), the remedy of hiring foreigners to fill US job openings does not resolve the
outstanding issue; in fact, it creates even more hiring imbalance for U.S. nationals in
STEM fields (Donnelly, 2002; Hira, 2007, 2010).
A second solution is to solve the shortage problem by identifying the reasons why
52% of highly qualified females leave science and engineering (Hewlett et al., 2008).
Hewlett et al.’s study, named the Athena Factor, identified the cultural problems at work
places, such as hostile all-male cultures, lack of support and sponsorship, perceived
unclear career prospect, as well as the “diving catch” working culture in STEM fields all
pose an unnecessary and extraneous stress on female STEM workers, whose sense of self
is always based on attachment and connection (Beutel & Johnson, 2004). According to
Hewlett et al., the attrition rates for STEM women spikes 10 years into their career,
which translates to their mid- to late 30s when many women workers need to choose
between career promotion and demand from familial needs. Athena Factor provided
25
corporate initiatives to break down hostile male-dominated cultures and isolation, as well
as to help young female workers into senior management. Hewlett et al. purported that by
reducing just one quarter of the female workers attrition, over 200,000 highly qualified
female STEM workers could remain in their jobs and replenish the shortage of the supply
pipeline.
Past literature also suggested a third possible solution which addresses changes in
the earlier stages of the supply pipeline of STEM workers. It involved the increment of
U.S. youths in entering the STEM fields, with the emphasis of the underrepresented
groups of women and minorities (Hunt, 2010). These can be achieved by providing better
K-12 education and more research funding and scholarships to encourage American
youths entering the STEM fields (NAS, 2006; IEEE, 2010).
Academic Preparation in K-12 for Physics and Engineering
Low enrollment in engineering at college could find its roots back to the students’
preparation from grade schools (Lindsay & Salzman, 2007; NAS, 2007; Norman, 2007).
Past studies provided further insight in persistence rates by gender being affected by
academic preparation (Ehrenberg, 2010; Griffith, 2011; Price, 2011). Griffith (2011)
pointed out that lower grades would lead to lower persistence, and particularly, the
relationship has a stronger effect on women. In fact, among the reasons for lowering
persistence in female students majoring in physics and engineering are the number of
courses, the difficulty levels, and the course grades in K-12 mathematics and high school
physics, the pre-college preparation, such as taking AP Calculus and AP Physics classes
and exams, performance in open examinations such as high scoring in SAT mathematics,
26
have all become the predictors of choices for majors in college and persistence rates at
the work fields (Griffith, 2011; Price, 2011; Ost, 2011). Based on this finding that
quality preparation in high school higher mathematics and pre-college physics will
determine a female student’s study choice in college, the present study will investigate
how female students’ various motivational and sociocultural factors reduce their interests
in taking physics at high school, and examine the relationship between these factors and
female students’ physics course-taking choice, intended majoring in college and career
selection.
In summary, past literature demonstrates that women have been underrepresented
in physics and engineering throughout the STEM pipeline. Many of them switched their
majors in college, while others left the technical fields to work in other non-STEM fields.
At high school, due to their past low performance in elementary mathematics, many
female students did not choose to study challenging pre-college courses in mathematics
as well as physics, and in turn, they did not offer themselves with enough choices for
their studies in college and career pathways.
Expectancy-related and Value-related Beliefs Influence Course Enrollment
Decisions, College Major Selection, and Career Choices
The previous section has pointed out that the lack of choice in major and career a
female student can pick in college is one of the reasons that manifests the
underrepresentation of female students in physics and engineering. The lack of choice in
major and career a female undergraduate can pick is due to the under academic
preparation in math-intensive and pre-college level science subjects of a female student
27
gains through her K-12 years (Griffith, 2011). Particularly, the fewer number of years of
high level mathematics and introductory physics a female student has studied in high
school, the less likely her list of choice for study and career will include physics and
engineering (Griffith, 2011; Ost, 2011; Price, 2011). Based on this argument, this study
traces the career pipeline for physicists and engineers all the way back to females’
childhood, and studies about the formation of their self-beliefs from their early age.
These self-perceptions of academic achievement and the consequent actual academic
achievement of females affect their proper learning at high school level. Consequently,
the author ponders that the lack of quality preparation in high school higher mathematics
and introductory physics is due to female students’ various motivational and sociocultural
factors that reduce female students’ interests in physics course-taking at high school
level. Therefore, the focus of this section is to study the sociocultural and motivational
factors that hinder female students’ performance in mathematics and physics.
Preparation in Mathematics for Physics and Engineering
The gender gap in mathematics performance can be backtracked to the elementary
grades. Fryer and Levitt (2010) found that when children entered kindergarten, there were
no observable differences in mathematics and reading achievement between the two
genders. However, by the end of fifth grade, girls fell more than 0.2 standard deviations
behind boys in mathematics. This underperformance by girls in mathematics was found
in every region, in every racial group, and in every socioeconomic status throughout the
country. Average female scores were 0.30 standard deviations lower than male scores in
mathematics while there was no significant gender difference in verbal section in tests
28
administered by College Board (Steffens et al., 2010). Since female students suffer from
sociocultural factors (gender stereotypes), many of them will find difficulties in handling
math-intensive courses, such as physical science and physics at middle school and high
school.
One may argue that the empirical findings (0.2-0.3 standard deviations) on gender
differences in mathematical competence are insignificant; however, the belief of male
mathematical superiority itself has been widely dispersed in the U.S. culture (Correll,
2001). Based on the expectancy-value model of achievement-related choices,
socialization processes linked to gender plays a critical role for math-related ability self-
concept, and in turn, this self-concept mediates the relationship between gender
stereotypes and math gender gap (Eccles, 1994, 2005). Since self-efficacy acts as an
active precursor of self-concept development (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003), lack of self-
efficacy due to mastery experience in mathematics may lead female students avoid taking
further mathematics courses as well as mathematics-related subjects, such as physics and
engineering. Consequently, these self-doubts affect young women even with good grades
in mathematics and science in imagining themselves successful in engineering (Becker,
2010).
Motivational Barriers Faced by Female Physics and Engineering Students
Female college undergraduates do not choose to enroll in engineering classes or
pursue engineering degrees at the same rate as male undergraduates (Amelink &
Creamer, 2010; Stout, et al., 2011). There are social and cultural factors that affect the
motivation of female undergraduates and prevent them from choosing engineering
29
professions (Concannon & Barrow, 2009, 2010; Correll, 2001, 2004; Furnham, Reeves,
& Budhani, 2002; Stout et al., 2011). The fact that females are underrepresented in this
field can send these students the message that they do not belong (Concannon & Barrow,
2010; Stout et al., 2011). Without role models to maintain subjective identification and
connectedness, female students lacked self-identity within this profession, and may not
value it as much as male students (Stout et al., 2011). This discrepancy also represents
cultural biases that affect female students from a much younger age (Furnham et al.,
2002; Stout et al., 2011). The messages female students receive from parents, teachers,
professors, and peers in both K-12 and postsecondary settings discourage them from
pursuing math-intensive and physics-related degrees in college (Becker, 2010; Stout et
al., 2011). Negative instructional environments that some professors maintain towards
female students in math-intensive courses pose a bias perception to the female students in
the field (Amelink & Creamer, 2010). These signals and beliefs can lower female
students’ self-efficacy in the fields of math and physics and cause them to doubt the
appropriateness of pursuing an engineering degree (Concannon & Barrow, 2009; Correll,
2001; Crocker, Karpinski, Quinn, & Chase, 2003; Lent et al., 2003). Eventually, female
students may have a hard time envisioning their successful completion of this degree and
their ability to acquire a job in engineering (Lent et al., 2003). If the expected outcomes
do not justify the effort involved in the minds of these students, they will have little
motivation to pursue this degree (Concannon & Barrow, 2009).
30
Motivational Barriers Faced by Females from Early Childhood to Adolescence
In addition to low self-identity female students perceive in the math-related
subject, there are also cultural biases that affect female students as early as they are in
elementary grades. These subtractive socialization processes through classroom or at
home, among peers or from parents, manifest female students’ mathematics-related
ability self-concept. This self-concept further mediates the relationship between gender
implicit stereotypes and mathematics gender gap (Correll, 2001; Eccles, 1994, 2005).
Past findings indicated that girls revealed implicit math-gender stereotypes and implicit
ability self-concepts favoring language over math as early as they were at fourth grade
(Steffens et al., 2010). In addition, these implicit mathematics-gender stereotypes
predicted math self-concepts, enrollment preferences, as well as school grades for female
students.
Implicit stereotypes which associate between gender and stereotypic attributes can
be activated automatically without intention or control (Steffens et al., 2010). While
female students do not personally endorse this stereotypic belief, they may still leave the
situation with a lower assessment of their own ability compared to a male performing at
the same level, due to the biasing effect of others’ expectations (Correll, 2001). In fact,
Becker (2010) pointed out that female self-doubts are further reinforced by the often
arrogant attitude of young male students who choose physics and engineering subjects
since there are no other good options for these male students. In order for a female
student to continue on a path toward a given career, the female student at the minimum
must adopt self-assessment -- a personal conception of herself as competent at the tasks
31
necessary for a given career in order to commit herself to pursuing that career. In
addition, Correll found that among adolescents, male students assess their mathematical
competence higher than females of equal mathematical ability. But since cultural beliefs
about mathematics advantage male students, performance feedback about their task
competence is less important to them in making self-assessments (Correll, 2001). This
feedback about their mathematical competence contributes a significantly larger effect on
the mathematical self-assessments of females compared to males. Meanwhile, Fryer and
Levitt (2010) analyzed the gender gap in mathematics using the Early Childhood
Longitudinal Study Kindergarten Cohort (ECLS-K). Their empirical results suggested
that there was no gender gap at kindergarten among the top five-percentile scorers in
mathematics test. However, by the time female students finished their fifth grade, they
only took up 28 % among the top five-percentile scorers.
In summary, past studies found that there exists low self-identity and high self-
doubts among female students in perceiving themselves to be successful in mathematics
and math-intensive subjects. In the following sections, this study will identify the
sociocultural and motivational factors that affect the female high school students’ physics
course-taking choice and achievement, as well as their evaluation to choose their major at
college and career path in physics or engineering work field, a traditional male-
dominated work place, under the lenses of expectancy-value theory, self-efficacy theory,
and acculturation effect.
32
Female Students’ Task Values Determine Their Course Choices
Expectancy-value theory. Eccles et al. (1983) expanded Atkinson’s (1957)
original definitions of expectancy for success and task value. Extensive studies done by
Eccles and her colleagues (Eccles et al., 1983; Schunk et al., 2010; Wigfield & Eccles,
2002) were conducted on upper elementary and junior high students in a self-report
format measuring their self-perceptions of expectancy for success and task value beliefs.
Data were collected at the beginning and at the end of a school year. Some studies even
followed through the students in subsequent years. Eccles and her colleagues ran path
analysis and structural equation modeling to examine the effects of expectancies and
ability perceptions versus their perceived grades and their actual grades in mathematics
and English. The significance of Eccles et al.’s (1983) proposal is that students’
achievement performance, persistence, and choice of achievement tasks are directly
predicted by their expectancies for success on those tasks and the subjective value they
achieve to succeed on those tasks.
Expectancy for success. Wigfield and Eccles (2002) defined expectancies for
success as an individual’s beliefs about how well he or she will do on an upcoming task.
Proximal and distal goals as well as self-concept of an individual’s abilities affect his or
her expectation for success. As stated in the following section about self-efficacy, there
are similarities and differences between self-concepts and self-efficacies (Bong &
Skaalvik, 2003). The primary difference is on an individual sense of his or her own
competence (self-efficacy), or his or her competence in comparison to others (self-
concepts). However, under typical motivational situations, perceived self-efficacy
33
correlates strongly with academic self-concept, and in turn, academic self-efficacy serves
as an active precursor of academic self-concept (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). Direct
measures on expectancy for success are often performed along with task values and self-
efficacy as the literature review reveals in this section (Amerlink & Creamer, 2010;
Hazari et al., 2010; Jones et al., 2010).
Subjective task values. In the achievement motivation literature, subjective task
values are defined as how a task matches different needs of an individual (Wigfield &
Eccles, 2002). There are four major components of subjective task values, namely,
attainment value, intrinsic value, utility value, and cost (Eccles et al., 1983). Affective
memories of an individual manifest his or her subjective value. Attainment value is
defined as the importance of doing well on a task. Intrinsic interest, or intrinsic value, is
the enjoyment people experience when doing a task, which is conceptually similar to
intrinsic interest in the intrinsic motivation theory of Deci and Ryan (Schunk et al.,
2010). Utility value is defined as the usefulness of the task for individuals in terms of
their future goals (Schunk et al., 2010) while cost belief is the perceived negative aspects
of engaging in the task (Wigfield & Eccles, 2002). According to expectancy-value
theory, achievement-related choices can be activated by a combination of success
expectation and subjective value. In many cases, an individual who feels competent at a
given activity may not engage in it because he or she does not find any subjective value
to engage or complete the task. Following this thought, further investigation can be
conducted to determine which subject value component would affect female students in
studying physics and engineering majors at college.
34
Physics identity. Hazari et al. (2010) purported the most important factors found
to influence persistence in science is affect, and there were two components directly
enhancing the students’ affect in science, namely, interests and recognition. Both could
affect the students’ choice of career. First, a large amount of past research using the
Social Cognitive Career Theory [SCCT] has found that interest has a significant impact
on career choices (Bandura, 1986; Hazari et al., 2010; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). In
particular, Hazari et al. cited that students’ eighth grade career interests in science served
to better predict their future chances of receiving a bachelor’s degree in sciences than
students’ eighth grade mathematics achievement. Adapting physics curriculum to address
the interests of female students had a positive effect on the physics self-concepts of the
female students. Second, recognition by others is vitally important to how the students
see him/herself, and in turn affect his/her subsequent choices. For instance, parents’
perceptions and expectations directly affected children’s self-perceptions and
expectations, and subsequently, influenced children’s career choices in future (Jacobs &
Eccles, 2000). Hazari et al.’s (2010) study found that female students’ perceived physics
identity is significantly lower than those of male students experience. However, the
difference in physics identity between the two genders dropped to insignificant values
when enhancing five factors that could be under control of high school physics teacher,
namely, focusing on conceptual understanding, conducting labs that address students’
beliefs about the world, discussing relevant real-life science, discussing about the benefits
of being a scientist, and encouraging students to take science classes. Assuming that these
factors can be integrated easily into physics curriculum and can ameliorate the self
35
identity gap in physics between the two genders, further study can be focused on
sociocultural and motivational factors on other self-beliefs that prevent the female high
school student from choosing physics and engineering as their college majors.
In addition, Zhu (2007) pointed out that male students preferred abstract
conceptualization than female students did. Hazari et al. (2010) extended this observation
and emphasized the importance of clarifying abstract conceptualization to close the
gender gap in physics identity. Without including empirical data to support, Zhu (2007)
claimed that the major sources of physics self-efficacy for female students were social
persuasions and vicarious experiences. However, Hazari et al. (2010) empirically argued
the importance of social persuasions in the form of discussing real-life science and
benefits of being a scientist as well as verbal encouragement to take further science
classes. Furthermore, the explicit discussion of underrepresentation of females in science
would positively enhance physics identity for female students. These all could affect
positively the career choice of female students in physics and engineering.
Academic expectancy-related and value-related beliefs. In addition, Jones et al.
(2010) conducted a study about the relation between expectancy-related as well as value-
related beliefs and achievement as well as career plans on 363 first-year engineering
students at a large mid-Atlantic state university. The variables under study included
engineering self-efficacy, engineering expectancy for success, engineering intrinsic
interest value, attainment value, utility value, identification with engineering, belief of
future career in engineering, and engineering grade point average (GPA). T tests and
multiple linear regression analysis were conducted to study the correlations of the
36
variables by gender and the predictability of achievement and career choice among the
variables respectively. The results found that expectancy-related beliefs served as a good
predictor for students’ achievement while value-related constructs predicted career plan
better for male and female students.
Jones et al.’s (2010) longitudinal study was done on incoming first-year
engineering students at the beginning and at the conclusion of their first year in the
program. Students’ perceptions decreased in all areas near the end of the first year. Jones
et al. indicated that whatever reasons for the decline in the variables under study, the
decrease in the rate of female perceptions is similar to the one of males’. Since many
first-year engineering students do not know much about the field of engineering, it is
arguably similar to the cognitive and metacognitive processes when many students take
introductory physics at high school level. It would be compulsory to study the high
school physics students by gender on their expectancy-related and value-related
constructs in an attempt to extend Jones et al.’s findings.
Female Students’ Self-Efficacy Determine Their Course Choices
Academic self-efficacy and academic self-concept. Bandura’s (1994) perceived
self-efficacy refers to an individual’s judgments of his or her ability to organize and
execute the courses of action in order to succeed in a given task. Self-efficacy beliefs
determine how an individual feels, thinks, motivates himself or herself and behaves. Four
effective ways to affect a sense of efficacy are mastery experience, vicarious experience,
verbal persuasion, and physiological reactions (Bandura, 1986). Meanwhile, task-specific
self-concept is a cognitive thinking through experiences with the environment, and is
37
mainly established through feedback from the environment as well as significant others
(Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). Moreover, self-concept and attribution form a reciprocal
relation such that causal attributions made for past successes and failures shape up an
individual’s self-concept, and the self-concept formed manifests future attributions. Since
motivational achievement research in the past always study on self-concept and self-
efficacy, a clarification about the similarities and differences of these two highly
analogous self-related concepts over specific domains, i.e., academic self-efficacy and
academic self-concept, will help to understand more about female’s sense of self.
According to Bong and Skaalvik (2003), academic self-efficacy refers to the
individual’s convictions that he or she can successfully perform a given academic task at
a designated level while academic self-concept refers to an individual’s knowledge and
perceptions about himself or herself in an achievement situation. Self-efficacy
emphasizes the belief that an individual can do with whatever skills and abilities he or
she may process (Bandura, 1986). Self-concept, on the other hand, calls for the constant
check on an individual’s skills and abilities (Schunk et al., 2010). The difference in time
orientation between the two constructs is that self-efficacy is future-oriented while self-
concept embodies fairly stable perceptions of the self that are past-oriented (Bong &
Skaalvik, 2003). Competence evaluation in self-concept relies strongly on social
comparison and, in turn, tends to be more normative. Meanwhile, self-efficacy evaluation
is primarily goal-referenced and most heavily affected by one’s enactive experiences
(Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). The two self-beliefs do have similarities; both use prior
38
mastery experience, social comparison, and reflected appraisals as their major sources of
constructs.
Bong and Skaalvik (2003) pointed out that even academic self-concept is an
important motivation construct that can be used as an indicator for better academic
achievement, interventions conducted by researchers, counselors and teachers would
mostly involve normative ability comparison among peers. Therefore, intervention
practicality would be a concern since insufficiently trained or poorly informed personnel
may generate adverse response from the students who already have a low level of self-
concept. Contrast to self-concept, students under the domain specific self-efficacy only
make judgment on their perceived capability without reflecting their feedback from the
situation (Zimmerman, 1996), and change in students’ academic self-efficacy may
require considerably less time and effort when compared with enhancing their academic
self-concept. Bong and Skaalvik also purported that under typical achievement situations,
perceived self-efficacy correlates strongly with academic self-concept. Therefore,
academic self-efficacy can be used as an active precursor of academic self-concept.
Based on Bong and Skaalvik’s findings above, the two self-beliefs could help to generate
better guidelines for investigators when analyzing data from research and practitioners
when designing proper enhancement and intervention.
Academic self-efficacy. Researchers extend their study on academic self-efficacy
to self-efficacy by a particular subject area. Self-efficacy is a strong predictor of
academic achievement, choice of course-taking, choice of majors in college, and career
decisions across all domains and age levels (Bandura, 1986, 1994). Bandura (1997)
39
hypothesized that sources of self-efficacy predict the science self-efficacy beliefs of
middle school students. Most important, students with high science self-efficacy prefer
science-related activities, expend higher effort on those activities, and persevere when
they encounter difficulties (Bandura, 1997). Britner and Parajes (2006) conducted a
science self-efficacy study on 319 middle school students in grades 5 through 8 at a small
Midwestern city. The socioeconomic status of the neighborhood is middle class and the
students were primarily Caucasians. The instrument used for studying the sources of
science self-efficacy was the Sources of Science Self-Efficacy Scale, which was adapted
from a scale in the domain of mathematics (Britner & Parajes, 2006; Lent, Lopez, Brown,
& Gore, 1996). Britner and Parajes’ study confirmed the past results that science self-
efficacy serves as a significant predictor of science achievement. The difference in
science self-efficacy found between the two genders was minimal and also consistent
with past researches. However, female middle school students expressed with more
anxiety about their performance in science class while earning higher final science grades
than their male peers. Therefore, the higher levels of science achievement among female
students at middle school did not reflect in their reported mastery experiences.
Bandura (1997) purported that the strength of the influence of mastery
experiences on science self-efficacy is similar to the self-efficacy in other academic
domains. The findings of Britner and Parajes (2006) supported such claim. Since science
curriculum at the middle school level is more concrete in concept and language-based
than science subjects in high school, the academic preparation in language skills at
elementary grades of the female middle school students offers them an academic
40
advantage over male students through the middle school science classes (Steffens et al.,
2010). However, the self-concept of female students in science is similar to their self-
concept in mathematics (Correll, 2001; Eccles, 1994, 2005). Since self-concept is past-
oriented in time, their performance anxiety in science is similar to their implicit math-
gender stereotype (Correll, 2001; Eccles, 1994, 2005; Steffens et al., 2010). Further
research will be needed to follow the change in domain-specific self-beliefs of the female
students when they encounter more math-intensive courses in high school.
Physics self-efficacy. There are very few studies on physics self-efficacy at high
school level. Among the few, Zhu (2007) discussed physics self-efficacy and its effect on
female students’ physics course-taking at high school. Physics self-efficacy (PSE) is an
individual’s belief in his or her ability to successfully negotiate the academic hurdles of
the physics curriculum, and it is a major predictor of students’ academic achievement,
career interest and course-taking in physics and engineering at college (Bandura, 1997;
Britner & Parajes, 2006). Zhu argued that females’ low rate of enrollment in physics
major was due to the deficits in PSE. Among all the possible factors, the combination of
contextual and content factors was likely to interact with each other to have a summative
influence on learning motivation and career interests of the students. While Britner and
Parajes (2006) suggested the influence of mastery experiences was the major source of
self-efficacy for students in science subjects that include physics, Zhu purported that
social persuasions and vicarious experiences should serve as the major sources of PSE for
female students.
41
Zhu (2007) cited Piaget’s (1997) four stages in cognitive development, namely,
sensor-motor stage, pre-operational stage, concrete operational stage, and formal
operational stage. In between 13 and 18 years of adolescence, a middle or high school
student was supposed to be close to, but not fully attained to the final formal operational
stage at which the abstract quality of thinking can be demonstrated (Callahan, Clark, &
Kellough, 1998). As a matter of fact, researchers criticized that only about one in three
young adolescents is a formal operational thinker (Santrock, 2009). Thus, many students
faced difficulties in linking their prior experience from concrete thinking stage to the
abstract thinking stage that are required to learn physics content effectively. The gender
difference in abstract conceptualization could be explained by the reason that male
students demonstrated a greater preference than female students for learning abstract
concepts (Zhu, 2007). Female students preferred a more conversational and collaborative
learning environment (Beutel & Johnson, 2004). However, such learning environment is
less likely found in a classroom of mathematics and science nowadays since high school
teachers have been busy catching up the required curriculum and meeting deadlines for
tests and benchmark examinations (Zhu, 2007).
When the author performed an article search on physics self-efficacy at high
school, there were only a handful of items available online. In fact, Zhu’s (2007) study
was the only few that discussed high school physics self-efficacy, rather than science
self-efficacy in general, or physics self-efficacy at college. Nonetheless, Zhu did not
conduct enough literature review to support her argument, nor the study was
accompanied with any empirical data to support her claim. Zhu argued that the major
42
sources of physics self-efficacy for female students were social persuasions and vicarious
experiences. However, without empirical data to support, her claim on females’ low
motivation was due to social persuasions and vicarious experience would be lack of
credibility. Meanwhile, many examples Zhu provided were based on the terms of values
and interests of the female students, where the two influences of motivation should be
better categorized in Expectancy-Value Theory. Moreover, Zhu’s explanation about
female students’ low abstract conceptualization of learning and the subsequent
recommendation for accommodation by teachers would more likely ameliorate the
physics anxiety that the female students have (Schunk et al., 2010). Therefore, it seems
the sources of self-efficacy being enhanced are physiological reactions (Bandura, 1994;
Schunk et al., 2010) rather than social persuasions or vicarious experiences that Zhu
purported. All in all, there were so few studies in the past focused on female students’
PSE at high school level, and additional research on such issue is recommended.
Engineering self-efficacy. Since self-efficacy is domain specific (Bandura,
1997), besides PSE, engineering self-efficacy is also a strong predictor of school
achievement, course-taking choice and career choice for engineering students (Britner &
Parajes, 2006). While there is no engineering curriculum offered at the high school level,
it will be insightful to investigate the gender difference in engineering self-efficacy (ESE)
at the college level to verify the consistency of gender gap throughout the STEM supply
pipeline.
One recent study about ESE was a cross-sectional study of 519 undergraduate
engineering students’ self-efficacy at a large, research extensive, Midwestern university
43
conducted by Concannon and Barrow (2009). ESE from the sample was based on two
versions of self-efficacy measurement, engineering career outcome expectations, and
coping self-efficacy. Their results extended that there was no statistically significant
difference between mean ESE score by gender as past research suggested. The
insignificance in gender difference in ESE could be explained by the homogenous
admissions process of engineering program in which all enrolled students had similar
high school grades and college entrance scores (Concannon & Barrow, 2009). Therefore,
students having like academic profile could have similar perceived judgments of their
ability to succeed in the same engineering program. Meanwhile, there was a difference in
coping self-efficacy such that female students demonstrated a lower mean coping self-
efficacy than male students did. In addition, African American students had significantly
lower engineering career outcome expectations than Caucasian students. Lastly,
Concannon and Barrow found that year four students had higher ESE scores than those of
year five students.
It should be noted that the majority of the engineering students in this sample
were Caucasian (87.4%) and the sample consisted of 86% male and 14% female students.
The high percentage of Caucasian students was not typical as the Science and
Engineering (S&E) bachelors degree holders who were non-Hispanic White males and
females were 48% and 25% respectively (Becker, 2010; May & Chubin, 2003; NSF,
2004; Steffens et al., 2010). Therefore, the insignificance in gender difference in ESE
found in this study may not be representative for schoolings in urban West Coast where
ethnically diverse population was the norm. In view of this, future study should be
44
extended to investigate students’ ESE by length of years in the program with a more
balanced gender and ethnicity distribution.
In summary, past research showed that as early as in their fourth grade, the female
students already revealed implicit math-gender stereotypes, which predicted math self-
concepts, enrollment preferences, as well as school grades for female students (Steffens
et al., 2010). Meanwhile, Hazari et al. (2010) purported that students’ eighth grade career
interests in science could better predict their future chances of receiving a bachelor’s
degree in sciences than students’ eighth grade mathematics achievement. These two
findings suggest that for female students at high school level, achievement in
mathematics affects achievement in math-intensive subjects, such as physics, and their
self-perceptions in science determines their career interests in science. Furthermore,
Jones et al. (2010) extended the findings to first-year engineering undergraduates that
expectancy-related beliefs served as a good predictor for students’ achievement while
value-related constructs predicted career plan better for male and female students. In
addition, while Bong and Skaalvik (2003) distinguished between academic self-efficacy
and academic self-concept, expectations for success and self-efficacy in practice
appeared to be similar constructs, at least over the engineering domain (Jones et al.,
2010). The present study explored to extend these findings from past research among
high school students of both genders in physics courses.
45
Acculturation and Enculturation Affect Asian American Students’ Achievement
and Course-taking Choices
Bidimentional Acculturation
Over the recent decades, there has been increased research on the relevance of
acculturation/enculturation to fields like psychosocial development, mental and physical
health, as well as academic performance prediction for various ethnic minorities.
Acculturation and enculturation deal with the process of change individuals experience in
the presence of two cultures: a heritage culture, the primary culture of the individuals’
personal or family origin; and a host/mainstream culture, the dominant regional or
national culture in which the individuals currently reside (Lee, Yoon, & Liu-Tom, 2006;
Yong, Kim, Chiang, & Ju, 2010). Acculturation has been conceptualized as the process of
adapting to the attitudes, values, and behaviors while enculturation reflects the degree of
adherence to the original personal or family culture (Yong et al., 2010). In the past,
acculturation has been conceptualized as a unidimensional model in which an individual
adapts to the surrounding mainstream culture discards (Chung, Kim, & Abreu, 2004; Lee
et al., 2010). In recent years, this unidimensional model was found to be flawed since it is
based on the assumption that an individual is only capable to adhere to one single culture
at a time (Lee et al., 2010). Research shows that enculturation operates relatively
independent to acculturation, that is, acculturation and enculturation can be
conceptualized as two sociocultural processes that are orthogonal to each other (Chung et
al., 2004). This bidimensional model is based on the high or low levels of acculturation
46
and enculturation, in that the responses of how individuals adhere to host and heritage
cultures can be categorized as integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization.
Development of AAMAS
In order to properly measure the degrees of acculturation and enculturation among
different generations of Asian Americans, Chung et al. (2004) conducted three studies on
American Asians in West Coast to develop the measurement, Asian American
Multidimentional Acculturation Scale (AAMAS) and to verify its validity and reliability.
The first two studies were conducted on Asian American undergraduates in a large West
Coast university to verify the reliability, validity, and factor structure, while the third
study was made on Korean Americans residing in Southern California in order to verify
the measurement’s test-retest reliability and to confirm its internal consistency. Results
from the three studies provided strong and ample evidence in support of AAMAS’s claim
for reliability and validity. In addition, multidimensional scale extends the orthogonal
conception of the two dimensions of adapting to host culture and adhering to heritage
culture to a third dimension of a pan-ethnic Asian American culture which conceptualizes
the emerging collective culture. The pan-ethnic Asian American culture is a process of
affiliating various Asian American cultures in opposing to other host and heritage
cultures individuals encounter. Moreover, the AAMAS was tested to consistently offer
high applicability across multiple ethnicities.
Acculturation and Asian Americans
Suinn (2010) conducted literature review to include publications between 2005
and 2009 about the acculturation affects Asian Americans’ health, adjustment, school
47
achievement, and counseling. The purpose of the study was to provide a summary of
prior findings of the various affects of acculturation for researchers seeking direction for
further research. Commenting on how acculturation affected Asian Americans perform at
school, Suinn suggested that high identification with the Asian culture of origin was
associated with high academic motivation and achievement among Chinese American
high school students. High SAT scores were also linked to high Asian identification. In
addition, high achieving children had aspiring parents who motivated their children to
perform better academically and to realize goals toward higher education (Suinn, 2010).
Acculturation/Enculturation Difference Between Generations and Between Genders
Lee et al. (2006) used a modified Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican
Americans-II (ARSMA-II; Cuellar et al., 1995) to validate the application of such
instrument on U.S. born and immigrant Asian Americans. Significant group differences
were found. First, both U.S.-born Asian Americans and immigrants Asian Americans
were more likely to use English than an Asian language in their daily conversation.
However, Asian American immigrants show greater proficiency in and preference for
speaking an Asian language than their corresponding U.S.-born Asian Americans who
were more proficient and preferred in speaking the English language. Second, immigrant
Asian Americans living on the West Coast showed more bidimensional in their social
interactions and identification than in their language usage. Third, Asian American
females in West Coast were more acculturated in the language usage domain but more
enculturated in the social interaction domain than Asian American males.
48
While the acculturation/enculturation levels between immigrant Asian Americans
and U.S.-born Asian Americans were found different as expected (Suinn, 2010), the
finding about the acculturation/enculturation difference by gender will need additional
research. In particular, the unique pattern of acculturation/enculturation found in Asian
American females in West Coast will require further study to unfold the lives of
immigrant and U.S.-born Asian American females, and in turn, further relate choice of
course-taking for preparation and majoring between gender among Asian Americans.
Moreover, the measurement model for the modified ARSMA-II used in Lee et al.’s
(2006) study only marginally fit (average 44% of variance) with the data based on Asian
Americans. It seems necessary to further scrutinize and justify the measurement model,
or to rerun conjunctionally with the AAMAS (Chung et al., 2004).
Conclusion
This literature review has studied and discussed about the shortage of physical
scientists and engineers in our nation. One possible solution presented to increase the
STEM worker supply is to attract more females to join the physics and engineering field
since traditionally there is an underrepresentation of females studying physics or
engineering at college as well as working as physical scientists and engineers at the work
place. Evidence from past studies showed that expectancy-related and value-related
beliefs affect female students’ persistence and achievement in engineering as well as their
choice of major in college and career path. However, the extensive studies in the past
were only focused at the collegiate level; there is no comprehensive study to date to
explore the affects of expectancy-related and value-related constructs on female students’
49
persistence and achievement in physics as well as on their majoring in college and career
choice at senior high school level. In addition, literature review showed that the more
math-intensive and math-related courses students take at high school, the better prepared
and more likely students will study science or engineering majors, and therefore, it is
compelling to study the motivational factors that prevent female students from preparing
and succeeding in study introductory physics at senior high school level. Furthermore,
among past research on Asian American as an ethnic minority in the U.S., even there
were studies on the acculturation and enculturation differences between generations and
between genders, but to date there is no study to examine how acculturation and
enculturation factors affect female Asian American students’ motivation in achievement,
choice in studying physics or engineering.
To extend the areas that past researches have not reached, this study investigates
into sociocultural and motivation factors that affect females in course-taking choice in
physics and career selection in physics or engineering. In particular, this study examines
the expectancy-related and value-related beliefs and acculturation/enculturation processes
which Asian American female students at the senior high school level face. Not only can
the findings extend the research areas in Asian American females and course-taking
choice in physics at high school, the present study also provides a potential solution to
ameliorate the labor shortage in STEM fields and contribute to the scientific advancement
in global competitiveness.
50
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
This chapter restates the research questions and describes the research
methodology of the present study. It also includes a discussion of the population,
sampling procedures, data collection instruments, data collection procedures, and
statistical analysis that were utilized in this study. The specific domain to be focused on is
physics course-taking at senior high school level. Therefore, the references made in this
chapter on variables and constructs about self-efficacy, expectancy for success, intrinsic,
attainment and utility values, and acculturation / enculturation as well as the intended
course-taking are all pertained to high school physics.
The present study provides insights into sociocultural and motivational barriers
causing the low count of females in majoring physics or engineering at college and
working as physical scientists and engineers at the work place. It also serves to extend the
framework of the expectancy-related beliefs, value-related beliefs, and
acculturation/enculturation as motivational and sociocultural factors affecting Asian
American female students in course-taking choice in physics and career selection in
physics or engineering.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
1) Do male and female high school physics students differ with respect to their self-
efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic
utility value, achievement, intended college major and career choice?
51
2) Do Asian American and non-Asian American high school physics students differ
with respect to their self-efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value,
attainment value, extrinsic utility value, achievement, intended college major and
career choice?
3) Does the immigration status of an Asian American high school student differ with
respect to their acculturation/enculturation, self-efficacy, success expectancies,
intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, achievement,
college major and career choice?
4) Does the parental education level of an Asian American high school student differ
with respect to their acculturation/enculturation, self-efficacy, success
expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value,
achievement, college major and career choice?
Research Design
In this study, an explanatory and nonexperimental design was used to assess the
effect of senior high school students’ expectancy-related beliefs, value-related beliefs,
and acculturation / enculturation on their achievement in physics, choice of studying
physics or engineering as a major in college and intended career related to physics or
engineering. Using quantitative inquiry methods, such as, t-tests and chi-squared tests,
this study examined whether students’ gender and ethnicity differ in their achievement,
intended major choice and career selection, and look into the correlations of their
motivational beliefs, such as, expectancy for success, various types of values, as well as
self-efficacy, with these intended academic outcomes. In addition, using statistics of t-
52
tests and chi-square tests, this study examined among Asian American students whether
their generational status and parental educational level predict achievement, intended
major choice and career selection as well as their motivational beliefs.
The variables in this study were: 1) expectancy for success, 2) intrinsic interest
value, 3) attainment value, 4) extrinsic utility value, 5) self-efficacy, 6) acculturation, 7)
enculturation, 8) 10-week Fall semester grade, 9) reason to take a high school physics
course, 10) gender, 11) generational status , 12) ethnicity, 13) parents’ highest
educational level, 14) intended college major, and 15) planned career choice.
Table 1: Demographic Information by High School
Avery Bell Cannon
Ethnicity
African American 1% 3% < 1.0%
American Indian /Alaska Native < 1% < 1% < 1.0%
Asian 72% 43% 63%
Filipino 2% 8% 2%
Hispanic or Latino 22% 37% 16%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
< 1% < 1% < 1%
White 3% 7%
15%
Two or More Races < 1% < 1%
< 4%
Socioeconomically disadvantaged 62% 40% 39%
English Learners 25% 19% 9%
Male 53.0% 56.0% 55.0%
Female 47.0% 4.0% 45.0%
Participants and Setting
440 students, males and females, Asians and non-Asians, were recruited from
three urban high schools located in three different mid- to small-size school districts in
Los Angeles County. The study involved three physics teachers, and a total of 14 classes.
Students were selected based on their enrollment in any one of the high school physics
53
classes, namely, Advanced Placement (AP) Physics B, AP Physics C, International
Baccalaureate (IB) Physics, and Physics. Table 1 provides a summary of the demographic
information of the three high schools.
Three schools were selected to ensure that the study contained an ample size of
sample to draw statistically significant results. In addition, all three high schools had a
similar ratio of student population, that is, Asian students dominated the school
population with at least 40%. In addition, the three schools were located within a radius
of 12 miles. The homogenous statistics from the three high schools could be treated as
one single sizable sample. Nonetheless, Bell High School administrator chose to conduct
the survey online only, and such arrangement merely attracted 16 respondents from Bell
High School. Since a presentable sample was needed from each school site, the current
study was only based on the data collected from Avery High School and Cannon High
School.
Table 2: Physics Students’ Demographic Information by Ethnicity and Gender
While each school population had almost an equal number of male and female
students, the enrollment in physics classes by gender did not follow the same ratio. As
shown in Table 2, the female-to-male ratio in physics class at Cannon School has
Avery
School
Cannon
School
Ethnicity
Asian 94.4% 88.7%
Hispanic or Latino 4.0% 5.3%
White 1.6% 5.0%
Male 52.4% 69.3%
Female 47.6% 30.7%
54
dropped to lower than 35%, equivalent to about two male students for every one female
student. In addition, while about 80% of any of the three schools were made up by the
two ethnical minority groups – Asian and Hispanic, there was a significant
underrepresentation of Hispanic students (less than 6%) in these mathematics-intensive
classrooms.
Instrumentation
A self-report survey made up of three instruments and ten demographics
questions were used to assess students’ expectancy-related beliefs and value-related
beliefs as well as Asian American students’ acculturation and enculturation to the host
and heritage cultures respectively. Provided that there was no single instrument in the
past studies to measure all the motivation and sociocultural constructs under this study,
selected scales that have been used to measure the specific constructs were implemented
together. A sample of the survey containing a complete list of the items in each scale can
be found in the Appendix A.
In addition, in consideration that some of the scales have not been used with
students at senior high school level or students taking physics, a preliminary study was
conducted to inquire 12 physics students in a similar school who has not participated in
the study to anonymously rate the wording and clearness of each of the scale items.
Students rated each item on a 5-point Likert-type scale that includes 1 (very poorly
written, do not use), 2 (poorly written, can be used if revised), 3 (acceptable, but could be
better), 4 (good, can be used and no major improvement is needed), and 5 (very good, no
major suggestion for improvement). If students ranked an item 4 or less, they were
55
invited for revision recommendations. This screening process provided a certain degree
of internal validity of the scale scores in the sample population.
Upon completion of data collection, the author estimated the internal consistency
reliability of the scales by computing Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and used the
following criteria to judge the values: greater than 0.9 is excellent, between 0.8 and 0.9 is
good, between 0.7 and 0.8 is acceptable, between 0.6 and 0.7 is questionable, between 0.5
and 0.6 is poor, and below 0.5 is unacceptable as recommended by George & Mallery
(2010). The suggested Cronbach’s alpha values for each of the scales are presented in the
following sections.
Physics Self-Efficacy
The Physics Self-Efficacy Scale (PSES; Caliskan, Selcuk, & Erol, 2007) was
developed to measure physics self-efficacy beliefs regarding one’s ability to successfully
perform physics tasks in physics classroom. PSES was designed to assess undergraduate
students’ self-efficacy beliefs in fundamental physics course. The scale comprises of 5-
point Likert-type items. The PSES contained 30 items with 5 dimensions, namely, 1. self-
efficacy towards solving physics problem (10 items), 2. self-efficacy towards learning
physics (4 items), 3. self-efficacy towards application of physics knowledge (6 items),
and 4. self-efficacy towards memorizing physics knowledge (3 items). In this study, only
self-efficacy toward solving physics problem (10 items) were used. The original
Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of self-efficacy towards solving physics problem
subscale is tabulated in Table 3 for reference and is used to compare the alpha
coefficients from this study in Chapter 4.
56
Table 3: Results of the Reliability Calculations Concerning PSES, AAMAS, as well as Self- and Task-Perception
Questionnaires
Number of
items
Cronbach’s
alpha
Demographics (e.g., gender, generational status) 10
Self-efficacy towards solving physics problem 10 0.91
Acculturation: Euro American (AAMAS-EA) 15 0.83
Enculturation: Culture of Origin (AAMAS-CO) 15 0.76
Ability/Expectancy-related
5
0.92
Intrinsic interest value 2 0.76
Attainment value 3 0.70
Extrinsic utility value 2 0.62
Total number of items 62
Acculturation and Enculturation
The Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale (AAMAS; Chung et
al., 2004) was developed to measure students’ acculturation to the host culture, namely,
the western Euro-American culture, and their enculturation to the heritage culture. The
scale comprises of 6-point Likert-type item, and there are 15 items in each of three
dimensions measured, namely, Euro American (EA), Culture of Origin (CO), and a pan-
ethnic Asian American (AA) culture. In this study, the first two dimensions were
adopted. The original Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients of each subscale adopted
from Chung et al.’s study are tabulated in Table 3 above for reference and are used to
compare the alpha coefficients found from this study in Chapter 4.
57
Expectancy for Success, Intrinsic Interest Value, Attainment Value, and Extrinsic
Utility Value
To measure constructs based on expectancy-value theory, students’ expectancy
for success, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, and extrinsic utility value were
measured using Self- and Task-Perception Questionnaires (STPQ; Eccles & Wigfield,
1995). The STPQ have been used with fifth through twelfth graders to assess their
expectancy-related and value-related factors in mathematics and English (Eccles et al.,
1983; Eccles & Wigfield, 1995). A total of 12 items from the STPQ were administered; 5
ability/expectancy items, 2 items each from intrinsic interest value and extrinsic utility
value, as well as 3 items from attainment values (see Table 3). Each item is subject to a 7-
point Likert type scale. As indicators, the past Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients
(e.g., Eccles et al, 1983; Eccles & Wigfield, 1995) were found ranging from 0.79 to 0.93
for the expectancy scale, 0.76 to 0.94 for the intrinsic interest value scale, 0.70 to 0.74
for the attainment value scale, and 0.62 to 0.93 for the extrinsic utility value scale (Jones
et al., 2010).
Due to the fact that the scales used by past researchers were used to measure
students’ perceptions in the domain of mathematics or science (Jones et al., 2010), the
questionnaire items have been modified slightly by replacing the word “mathematics” or
“science” with “physics” or “physics or engineering”. The two revised phrases had a
slightly different wording of “or engineering” insertion, this was to ensure that students
made response to the item with their intended college major and career selection in mind,
and not limited to the current physics courses they were studying. The alpha coefficients
58
from the sample population have been calculated and compared against the past
coefficients for internal reliability references in Chapter 4.
10-Week Fall Semester Grade
The present study was conducted after the first ten weeks of Fall semester.
Participating students reported their 10-week letter grade in the current physics course.
Students’ overall grade point average (GPA) was not collected since the focus of the
present study was only on their achievement in the current physics courses. For the high
school introductory physics course, students’ letter grade was encoded as follows: A =
4.0; B = 3.0; C = 2.0; D = 1.0; and F = 0.0. For Advanced Placement courses, that is, AP
Physics B, AP Physics C, and IB Physics, a weighted GPA method to map students’ letter
grade as follows: A = 5.0; B = 4.0; C = 3.0; D = 1.0; and F = 0.0 was used.
Gender, Ethnicity, and Generational Status
For gender, the coding was Male = 2 and Female = 1. For ethnicity, nominal
codes were assigned as follows: Asian Indian = 1; Cambodian = 2; Chinese = 3; Filipino
= 4; Japanese = 5; Korean = 6; Laotian = 7; Vietnamese = 8; Other Asian (such as
Indonesian, Malaysian, or Thai) = 9; African American = 11; Hispanic or Latino = 12;
White (Non-Hispanic) = 13; American Indian or Alaska Native = 14; Other Non-Asian =
15. Due to the distribution of the ethnicity from the sample population, further
consolidation of the ethnicity groups, namely, Asian American (1) versus non-Asian
American (0), and Chinese American (1) versus Non-Chinese Asian American (0) were
performed for reporting and analysis purpose that will be found in chapter four.
59
In addition, in order to study the effect of acculturation to host culture and
enculturation to heritage culture, the generational status of the students was surveyed.
The coding for the generational status was as follows: Recent immigrant in the last four
years = 5; Immigrant for more than four years = 4; Born in the U.S but parents were
immigrants = 3; Student and his/her parents were all born in the U.S. = 2; Student,
his/her parents and grandparents were all born in the U.S. = 1. The rationale to split the
foreign born students into two categories was based on the past finding that students’
eighth grade career interests in science could better predict their future chances of
receiving a bachelor’s degree in sciences than students’ eighth grade mathematics
achievement (Hazari et al., 2010). Since most students took advanced or elective science
courses such as physics when they were at junior or senior level in high school, it would
be of interests to study whether there was any difference in students’ recent or early
immigrant status that affects their choice of major and career. Due to the distribution of
the generational status from the sample population, further consolidation of the
generational groups, namely, domestic born student (0) versus foreign born student (1),
was performed for reporting and analysis purpose that will be found in chapter four.
Parents’ Highest Education Level
In order to study parental influence on Asian American students, the highest
educational level of both parents were surveyed. Eight levels of education background
were coded: Some grade school = 1; High school diploma/GED equivalent = 2; Some
college courses = 3; AA degree = 4; BA or BS degree = 5; Masters degree = 6; Doctoral
degree = 7; Professional degree = 8. Both paternal and maternal education levels as well
60
as the combined parental education level mean were used to study whether there was an
effect upon student’s achievement, motivational and sociocultural beliefs, intended
college major and planned career choice.
Reason for Taking This Physics Course
Response on the reason to take the physics course the student was being surveyed.
The choices for responses cover proximal expectations rather than intermediate goal such
as intended college major or distal goal such as planned career choice. Students were
only allowed to circle one choice. Choices and their numeric code are listed in Table 4.
Table 4: Reason For Taking This Physics Course
Choice of Reasons
Choice
Number
This course helps me preparing my major in college 1
I need this class as a science objective to fulfill college admissions requirement 2
I am interested in learning the subject matter 3
This course I enrolled is an AP or IB class. I need the weighted GPA 4
My counselor told me to take this class 5
My parents told me to take this class 6
My buddies / best friend are in this class 7
I need to make up this class to replace the grade from last year 8
My choice of class was full, so I was assigned to this class 9
My first choice of class was full, this class was my second or third choice 10
I want this semester to be relaxing, so I enrolled this class 11
I took this class because I wanted to be challenged 12
Data Collection Procedures
Before the beginning of data collection, the author obtained Institutional Review
Board (IRB) approval from the University of Southern California and the three school
61
districts in Los Angeles County. Participants were recruited from 14 physics classes with
an offer of gift card lottery upon completion of the survey. In accordance with an
approved petition to the IRB, all of the participants were explained about the study in an
overview of the research study and sent home a set of parental consent and student assent
forms (see Appendices B & C). Should they choose to participate, their responses would
remain anonymous. They were also informed that their participation was voluntary and
that, if they chose not to participate, they could simply return an incomplete questionnaire
without any penalty in their class. A signed student assent form was required for
participation in this study. The participants and their parents were explained that the
study was about students’ preference in taking physics course, their intended major
choice and career selection related to such course-taking. About 440 students from the
three high schools were invited to participate, and 274 students (more than three-fifths of
the recruitment) returned the signed student assent forms and participated in the survey.
Data collection for this study took place after the first 10 weeks in Fall semester.
For those physics students who were senior, this was also the period for college
application and students could have a better idea of their intended college major. The
author explained the procedures of how to fill in the self-report questionnaire but did not
offer additional verbal elaboration of the wordings in each item in order to prevent
unparallel assistance in interpreting the questionnaire. Students in Avery School and
Cannon School were given free time in class to complete the survey, and for those who
decided to take the survey home, they were allowed to return the survey in three days. In
either way, the survey was able to complete in about 30 minutes. There was also an
62
online version available at qualtrics.com for those participating students in Bell High
School; however, the response rate at Bell High was so low that only 16 online responses
were recorded. In view of the low response rate, Bell High participants were not included
in the report and analysis in the following chapters.
Data Analysis
After data are collected, they were coded numerically and entered into Microsoft
Excel 2007, then imported into IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)
version 19.0 for further coding verification, reverse coding if needed, and statistical
analysis. Note that the critical level of statistical significance (p) was set at 0.05 for
reporting purposes unless stated otherwise. Upon the data import into SPSS, descriptive
statistics such as means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of the variables were
first calculated. Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients were run for each motivational
and sociocultural instrument to determine the instrument’s internal reliability.
Research Question One: Exploring Differences between Male and Female Physics
Students
The first research question is: Do male and female high school physics students
differ with respect to their self-efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value,
attainment value, extrinsic utility value, achievement, intended college major and career
choice? The mean of the overall physics students with those of male physics students and
female physics students were compared. In addition, t-tests for motivational beliefs and
achievement were performed. For other nominal variables, such as intended college
63
major, planned career choice and reason to take physics course, nonparametric chi-square
tests were carried out.
Research Question Two: Exploring Differences between Asian and Non-Asian
Physics Students
The second research question is: Do Asian American and non-Asian American
high school physics students differ with respect to their self-efficacy, success
expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value,
achievement, intended college major and career choice? The mean of the overall physics
students with those of Asian and non-Asian physics students were compared. In addition,
t-tests for motivational beliefs and achievement were performed. For other nominal
variables, such as intended college major, planned career choice and reason to take
physics course, nonparametric chi-square tests were carried out.
Research Question Three: Exploring Differences in Generational Status of Asian
American Students
The third research question is: Does the immigration status of an Asian American
high school student differ with respect to their acculturation / enculturation, self-efficacy,
success expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value,
achievement, college major and career choice? The mean of all the Asian students in
advanced and introductory physics courses with their generational status were calculated.
In addition, t-tests to determine whether there were mean differences between Asian
American high school students based on their generational status relate to their
acculturation / enculturation, motivational beliefs, and achievement were performed. For
64
other nominal variables, such as intended college major, planned career choice and
reason to take physics course, nonparametric chi-square tests were carried out.
Research Question Four: Exploring Differences in Parental Education Level of
Asian American Students
The fourth research Question is: Does the parental education level of an Asian
American high school student differ with respect to their acculturation / enculturation,
self-efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic
utility value, achievement, college major and career choice? The mean of all the Asian
students in advanced and introductory physics courses with their parental education level
were calculated. In addition, t-tests to determine whether there were mean differences
between Asian American high school students based on their paternal, maternal and
combined parental education levels relate to their acculturation / enculturation,
motivational beliefs, and achievement were performed. For other nominal variables, such
as intended college major, planned career choice and reason to take physics course,
nonparametric chi-square tests were carried out.
Limitations
For t-tests, the present study reported Cohen’s d as the measure of effect size,
which is a standardized measure of the strength of the relationship between two variables.
The calculated Cohen’s d values were interpreted using an often-cited rule of thumb: a d
of 0.2 is small, 0.5 is medium, and 0.8 is large (Cohen, 1988). For chi-square tests, the
study reported phi-coefficient as a reference of the effect size measurement. In addition,
the present study had a few limitations that need to be taken into consideration when
65
interpreting the current findings. First, there was no way to control for possible
confounding variables happened at the teacher, classroom, and school level. These
variables could potentially affect and alter the students’ motivational, cognitive and
metacognitive effort in various physics courses at various degrees. Second, although the
sample schools did have similar profiles and characteristics, it would be impossible to
control all the confounding variables, such as, the quantity and quality of physics
instruction as well as teachers’ enthusiasm in the domain of physics and their influence
on the students. Last but not the least, recent budget crisis in education could affect the
number and the quality of advanced and elective physics classes, and in turn, adversely
affected the students’ opportunities of exposure to an interesting subject that might define
his or her major choice and career selection.
Finally, the present study was based on a nonexperimental design, which involved
attribute variables that could not be manipulated by the researcher and could only be
studied as they existed. Similar to any nonexperimental study, the present study was
limited to observe the existence of two variables and relate the change of one dependent
variable with respect to the change of one independent variable; however, it would be
uncertain that outcome differences were due to the independent variable under
investigation, or able to make claims about definitive causal conclusions.
Delimitations
The list of variables under the present study was extensive. However, there was
no plan to include every single observable motivational or sociocultural variable. Some
of those variables that were not included are as below. First, pan-ethnic Asian American
66
acculturation was not considered since the present study has only been focused on Asian
American student’s choice of college major due to the influence between Western culture
and his or her culture of origin. Second, only the parental education level was considered
in this study. A direct investigation of Asian American students’ familial influence, such
as perceived parenting style, perceived parents’ expectation on children’s major in
college, and household income, was not taken into consideration, though some of these
factors may already be redundant to the effects of the acculturation and enculturation
variables. Third, there was a concern that the length of the survey might be too long so
that participating students would feel overwhelmed and became careless in answering the
questionnaire. This serves as another reason why pan-ethnic Asian American
acculturation from AAMAS and three subscales of physics self-efficacy from PSE were
omitted in the study. Finally, only students who were taking a high school physics course
beyond fulfilling the high school graduation requirement of two-year science courses
were surveyed. The reason to do this was to contrast the choice difference in studying
physics by gender or the physics utility value students perceive, rather than the choice
difference, say, in between taking a science elective and a visual and performing arts
(VAPA) elective.
The results of this study have been reported in the next chapter. Then in chapter
five, a summary of the major findings, implications for research and practice,
recommendations for future research and practice as well as a final conclusion are
provided.
67
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
This chapter presents statistical outcomes for the research questions that guided
this study.
Preliminary Analysis
Descriptive Statistics
Among the two sample schools, Avery High School and Cannon High School,
274 students (105 females, 169 males; 250 Asians and 24 non-Asians) participated in the
study. In addition, 189 of the 250 Asian students were born in the U.S while 60 were
immigrants (one did not indicate generational status). After checking the frequency
distribution of the independent variables (gender, ethnicity, generational status, parental
highest education levels), it was noticed that there were too few counts in some
categories of ethnicity and generational status (see Table 5 and 6). There was a need to
consolidate the independent variables (ethnicity and generational status) which had
multiple categories into dichotomous variables (for Ethnicity: Asian = ‘1’ versus non-
Asian ‘0’, and for Immigration Status: Foreign born = ‘1’ versus Domestic born = ‘0’).
Chi-square tests were then used to determine whether there was any difference in
motivational and sociocultural variables between groups.
Table 5: Generational Status of Asian Students (n = 250)
Group Ethnicity Number
Immigrant
Recent immigrant in the last four years 9
Immigrant for more than four years 51
U.S. born
Born in the U.S but parents were immigrants 176
Student and his/her parents were all born in the U.S. 6
Student, his/her parents and grandparents were all born in the U.S. 7
68
Table 6: Participants by Ethnicity (N = 274)
Group Ethnicity Number
Asian
Asian Indian 3
Cambodian 6
Chinese 187
Japanese 2
Korean 4
Laotian 1
Vietnamese 18
Other Asian 29
Non-
Asian
Hispanic 13
White 9
Other Non-Asian 2
Table 7: Frequency Distribution of Students’ Proximal Goal to Take a Physics Course (N = 273)
Choice No.
a
Reason to Take This Physics Course frequency
3 I am interested in learning the subject matter 76
1 This course helps me prepare for my major in college 70
12 I took this class because I wanted to be challenged 46
2 I need this class as a science objective to fulfill college admissions requirement 41
6 My parents told me to take this class 11
4 This course I enrolled is an AP or IB class. I need the weighted GPA 9
10 My first choice of class was full, this class was my second or third choice 5
5 My counselor told me to take this class 4
9 My choice of class was full, so I was assigned to this class 4
11 I wanted this semester to be relaxing, so I enrolled this class 3
7 My buddies / best friend are in this class 2
8 I need to make up this class to replace the grade from last year 2
Note:
a
Original choice number in the survey (see Appendix A)
Moreover, the proximal goal of the participants (N = 273; one did not indicate
reason to take physics course) taking a physics course is enlisted in Table 7 in descending
order of frequency. The top four choices that the students selected most are “I am
interested in learning the subject matter”, “This course helps me prepare for my major in
college”, “I took this class because I wanted to be challenged” and “I need this class as a
science objective to fulfill college admissions requirement”. Among 274 respondents,
233 students, that is, more than 85% of the entire population chose these four choices.
69
This suggested that the major reason to take a physics course was based on students’
desire to learn or to prepare for college admission requirement. These students were
motivated to take a physics course, and found a utility value of physics course taking in
terms of their future goals. There were only 6% (n = 17) who took the class due to the
influence of others, namely, parents (n = 17; choice #6), counselors (n = 4; choice #5)
and close friends (n = 2; choice #7) and had no intrinsic or extrinsic motivation.
Table 8: Means, Standard Deviations, Computed and Referenced Cronbach's Reliability Coefficients
N
n-point
Likert
scale
number
of items
M SD α
α (from previous
studies)
Physics self-efficacy
273 5 10 34.12 6.708 0.893 0.91
Intrinsic interest value
274 7 2 8.19 2.929 0.896 0.76-0.94
Attainment value
274 7 3 16.44 3.248 0.676 0.70-0.74
Extrinsic utility value
274 7 2 8.36 2.872 0.622 0.62-0.93
Expectancy for success
274 7 5 21.57 6.969 0.923 0.79-0.93
Acculturation
249 6 15 68.29 10.271 0.873 0.83
Enculturation
245 6 15 59.94 11.614 0.869 0.76
Table 8 enlists the descriptive statistics and Cronbach’s reliability coefficients
for the motivational (self-efficacy for solving physics problems, expectancy for
success, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value) and
sociocoultural (acculturation and enculturation) variables measured in this study for all
participants. All coefficients, except those for physics self-efficacy (α = .893) and
attainment value (α = .676), either fell within the range of suggested values or
exceeded the suggested value from previous studies. Only the coefficients of
attainment value (α = .676) and extrinsic utility value (α = .622) were less than 0.7 and
their reliabilities could become questionable; the rest were considered good or
70
excellent in estimating the internal consistency reliability as recommended by George
and Mallery (2010).
Table 9: Intercorrelation Matrix Between Achievement, Intended College Major, Planned career choice, and
Parental Education Level, Expectancy-related and Value-related Variables for All Participants (N = 274; p =
0.01)
Correlation
Intended
college
major
Intended
career
choice
Achieve-
ment
Self-
efficacy
Intrinsic
value
Attainment
value
Utility
value
Expectancy
for
success
Parental
Education
Intended
college major
1 .859 -.295 -.366 -.238 -.218 -.343 -.297 .026
a
Planned career
choice
1 -.263 -.369 -.281 -.200 -.322 -.306 .030
a
Achievement 1 .438 .358 .255 .255 .593 .116
a
Self-efficacy 1 .593 .519 .516 .758 .090
a
Intrinsic value 1 .528 .588 .575 .110
a
Attainment value 1 .569 .406 .053
a
Utility value 1 .426 .042
a
Expectancy 1 .113
a
Parental
Education
1
Note:
a
= Correlation is insignificant as p > 0.05 level (2-tailed).
In order to extend the previous findings on expectancy-related and value-related
beliefs to the domain of physics among students at high school level, especially female
high school students, Pearson correlation tests between 9 variables, namely,
achievement (self-report 10-week grade), intended college major, planned career
choice, parent highest education level, and the motivational variables (self-efficacy for
71
solving physics problems, expectancy for success, intrinsic interest value, attainment
value, extrinsic utility value) were run. See Table 9 for all participants and Table 10 for
male and female students. Results in Table 9 show that eight variables were at least
weakly correlated with each other at the significant level p = 0.01 for all participants.
The strongest correlation was between intended college major and planned career
choice (r(274) = .859, p < 0.01). This suggested that future choice of college major
and career path can be used to predict each other. The second strongest correlation was
between expectancy for success in physics and self-efficacy in solving physics
problems (r(274) = .758, p < 0.01). The perceptions of these two self-competences are
closely dependent and will be discussed in more details in chapter five. The third
strongest correlation was between expectancy for success in physics and self-reported
10-week grade in physics (r(274) = .593, p < 0.01). In such, perception of higher
competence of a student when compared to peers can predict his or her academic
performance in class. Moreover, as value-related beliefs, this study found that intrinsic
interest value, attainment value and extrinsic utility value were correlated with each
other (r(274) = .528 - .588, p < 0.01). Lastly, expectancy for success was correlated
with intrinsic value (r(274) = .575, p < 0.01), and physics self-efficacy was correlated
with all three value-related beliefs (r(274) = .516 - .593, p < 0.01), which suggest that
expected-related beliefs are correlated with value-related beliefs.
72
Table 10: Intercorrelation Matrix Between Achievement, Intended College Major, Planned Career Choice,
Expectancy-related and Value-related Variables for Male (n = 169) and Female Participants (n = 105)
Correlation
/Sig (2-tailed)
Male
Intended
college
major
Planned
career
choice
Achievement
Physics
self-
efficacy
Intrinsic
value
Attainment
value
Utility
value
Expectancy
for success
Parental
Education
Female
Intended
college
1 .924
b
-.299
b
-.408
b
-.237
b
-.255
b
-.349
b
-.304
a
-.0.013
.000 .006 .015 .028 .077 .001 .017 .866
Planned
career choice
.707
b
1 -.294
b
-.409
b
-.258
b
-.267
b
-.336
b
-.305
b
-.006
.000
.000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .936
Achievement
-.268
b
-.166 1 .441
b
.351
b
.221
b
.244
b
.594
b
.104
.006 .090
.000 .000 .004 .001 .000 .183
Physics self-
efficacy
-.238
a
-.223
a
.426
b
1 .552
b
.523
b
.476
b
.759
b
.043
.015 .022 .000
.000 .000 .000 .000 .578
Intrinsic
value
-.215
a
-.294
b
.370
b
.656
b
1 .509
b
.586
b
.554
b
.080
.028 .002 .000 .000
.000 .000 .000 .304
Attainment
value
-.174 -.113 .356
b
.573
b
.597
b
1 .576
b
.417
b
.009
.077 .253 .000 .000 .000
.000 .000 .999
Utility value
-.312
b
-.268
b
.271
b
.568
b
.582
b
.594
b
1 .398
b
.019
.001 .006 .005 .000 .000 .000
.000 .806
Expectancy
for success
-.233
a
-.238
a
.590
b
.739
b
.606
b
.438
b
.459
b
1 .082
.017 .015 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.296
Parental
Education
.104 .107 .144 .172 .158 .157 .075
.175 1
.296 .283 .149 .083 .113 .114 .452
.079
Note:
a
= Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
b
= Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The remaining coefficients for correlated pairs were weakly significant in the
range between 0.200 and 0.426 at 0.01 p level. Moreover, the p level of all correlation
coefficients between parents’ education level and any other variables was more than 0.05;
that is, no correlation of parental educational level with achievement, intended college
major, planned career choice, or any motivational variables was found. In summary, the
significant correlations between the variables propose that, without indication of
73
causality, high school physics students’ achievement performance , intended college
major and planned career choice were predicted by their expectancy-related beliefs and
their value-related beliefs.
When the Pearson correlation test was performed for male students only, a similar
pattern of correlation pairs formed among achievement, intended college major, planned
career choice and motivational variables as those for all participants were found. Refer to
the upper right half of Table 10, parents’ highest education level remained as the only
inert variable that did not show any correlation with other variables. The Pearson
correlation test was also run on female students only. Refer to the lower left half of Table
10, there was no correlation found between parents’ highest educational level and any
other variables. This was consistent with the results for all participants and male students
only. In general, achievement, intended college major and planned career choice of
female students were weakly correlated with motivational constructs, similar to those of
all participants and male students only.
The significant correlations between the variables propose that, without indication
of causality, female high school physics students’ intended college major and planned
career choice are directly predicted by their expectancy-related beliefs (physics self-
efficacy and expectancy for success) and their value-related beliefs (intrinsic interest
value and extrinsic utility value). However, out of surprise, there were also three
insignificances in correlation found between variables. The coefficients between
attainment value and intended college major (r(105) = -0.174, p = 0.077), attainment
value and planned career choice (r(105) = -0.113, p = 0.253), and achievement and
74
planned career choice (r(105) = -0.166, p = 0.090) were found insignificant. That is,
female students do not find the importance of doing well in physics (attainment value)
could be related to their intended college major and planned career choice. Furthermore,
female high school physics students’ achievement (self-report 10-week grade in physics)
is directly predicted by their expectancy-related beliefs (physics self-efficacy and
expectancy for success) and their value-related beliefs (intrinsic interest value, attainment
value, and extrinsic utility value). Last but not the least, there was no correlation between
female students’ achievement in physics and planned career choice. Therefore, female
students’ achievement in physics cannot predict their planned career choice.
Research Question One
Research Question One: Do male and female high school physics students differ with
respect to their self-efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment
value, extrinsic utility value, achievement, intended college major and career choice?
A series of t-tests was run to examine the main effect of gender (female coded as
‘0’ and male as ‘1’) among all participants (N = 274) on the following variables: physics
self-efficacy, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, expectancy
for success, and achievement (self-reported 10-week grade). Chi-square tests were run to
examine the main effect of gender on intended college major and planned career choice.
Results are provided in Table 11 and 12. T–tests revealed a significant effect for physics
self-efficacy (t(272) = -2.658, p = 0.008, ES = -.3336) and expectancy for success (t(272)
= -2.548, p = 0.011, ES = -.3220). Since females were coded as ‘0’ and males as ‘1’, the
75
two negative t –scores implied that the mean values of female students’ physics self-
efficacy and expectancy for success were less than those of male students.
Table 11: T-test for Gender (females = ‘0’ and males = ‘1’) on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs,
and Value-related Beliefs (N = 274)
t df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Cohen's D
if
significant
Physics self-efficacy
-2.658 272 0.008 -0.2187 0.0823 -0.3336
Expectancy for success
-2.548 272 0.011 -0.3742 0.1469 -0.3220
Intrinsic interest value
-1.442 272 0.150 -0.2619 0.1816
Attainment value
1.188 272 0.236 0.1596 0.1344
Extrinsic utility value
-1.559 272 0.120 -0.2775 0.1780
Achievement
-0.976 272 0.330 -0.1069 0.1095
Table 12: Chi-square Test for Gender (females = ‘0’ and males = ‘1’) on Intended College Major and Planned
Career Choice (N = 274)
Pearson
Chi-
Square
N of Valid
Participants
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Phi value
Intended college major
15.346
a
274 3 0.002 0.237
Planned career choice
18.942
a
274 3 0.000 0.263
Note:
a
= 0 cell has expected count less than 5.
The negative significant gender effect on physics self-efficacy suggested that
male students had a stronger physics self-efficacy as a group compared to the self-
efficacy of female students. The negative significant gender effect on expectancy for
success indicated that the male students had a stronger belief that they could succeed in
this course than female students had. In addition, chi-square tests suggested there was a
significant effect between intended college major (χ
2
(3) = 15.346, p = 0.002, ES = 0.237)
and planned career choice (χ
2
(3) = 18.942, p < 0.05, ES = 0.263). The significant effect
of gender on both intended college major and planned career choice indicated that more
male students sought to study and work in physics and engineering fields than female
76
students did while more female students sought to study and work in non-science fields
than male students did.
Research Question Two
Research Question Two: Do Asian American and non-Asian American high school
physics students differ with respect to their self-efficacy, success expectancies, intrinsic
interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, achievement, intended college
major and career choice?
A series of t-tests was run to examine the main effect of ethnicity (Asian coded as
‘1’ and non-Asian as ‘0’) on the following variables: physics self-efficacy, intrinsic
interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, expectancy for success, and
achievement (self-reported 10-week grade). Chi-square tests were run to examine the
main effect of ethnicity on intended college major and planned career choice. Results are
provided in Table 13 and 14. This study found that there was no significant difference
between Asian and non-Asian physics students in their expectancy-value related beliefs,
achievement, intended college major and planned career choice in the sample population
of this study.
Table 13: T-test for Ethnicity (Asian coded as ‘1’ and non-Asian as ‘0’) on Achievement,
Expectancy-related Beliefs, and Value-related Beliefs (N = 274)
t Df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Physics self-efficacy
0.801 272 0.424 -0.1147 0.1432
Expectancy for success
0.904 272 0.367 0.2306 0.2552
Intrinsic interest value
1.348 272 0.179 0.4212 0.3125
Attainment value
1.019 272 0.309 0.2358 0.2313
Extrinsic utility value
-0.794 272 0.428 -0.2437 0.3070
Achievement
0.440 272 0.660 0.0830 0.1886
77
Table 14: Chi-square Test for Ethnicity (Asian coded as ‘1’ and non-Asian as ‘0’) on Intended College Major
and Planned Career Choice (N = 274)
Pearson
Chi-
Square
N of Valid
Participants
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Phi value
Intended college major
1.977
a
274 3 0.577 0.085
Planned career choice
2.173
b
274 3 0.537 0.089
Note:
a
= 1 cell has expected count less than 5.
b
= 2 cells have expected count less than 5.
Table 15: t-test for Chinese vs Non-Chinese Among Asian American Students (Chinese
coded as ‘1’ and non-Chinese as ‘0’) on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs, and
Value-related Beliefs (n = 250)
t df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Physics self-efficacy
0.363 248 0.717 0.0355 0.0979
Expectancy for success
0.247 248 0.805 0.0436 0.1762
Intrinsic interest value
1.053 248 0.293 0.2196 0.2085
Attainment value
-1.077 248 0.283 -0.1676 0.1556
Extrinsic utility value
0.886 248 0.376 0.1862 0.2101
Achievement
0.521 248 0.603 0.0659 0.1265
Table 16: chi-square test for Chinese vs Non-Chinese Among Asian American Students
(Chinese coded as ‘1’ and non-Chinese as ‘0’) on Intended College Major and Planned
Career Choice (n = 250)
Pearson
Chi-
Square
N of Valid
Participants
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Phi value
Intended college major
2.425
a
250 3 0.489 0.098
Planned career choice
2.072
a
250 3 0.558 0.091
Note:
a
= 0 cell has expected count less than 5.
In addition, among 250 Asian students of Avery High School and Cannon High
School, 187 (75%) were of Chinese ethnicity. The study extended to run a similar set of
t-tests and chi-square tests to examine the main effect among Asians (Chinese coded as
‘1’ and non-Chinese as ‘0’) on the same set of variables. Results are provided in Table 15
and 16. Similar to the comparison between Asian American students and non-Asian
American students, there was no significant difference found between Chinese American
and non-Chinese Asian American physics students in their expectancy-value related
78
beliefs, achievement, intended college major and planned career choice in the sample
population of this study.
Research Question Three
Research Question Three: Does the immigration status of an Asian American high school
student differ with respect to their acculturation/enculturation, self-efficacy, success
expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value,
achievement, college major and career choice?
As pointed out at the beginning of this chapter, the study on generational status of
the Asian American students in this study has been consolidated into immigration status.
A series of t-tests was run to examine the main effect of immigration status (U.S. born =
0, foreign born = 1) on the following variables: acculturation, enculturation, physics self-
efficacy, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, expectancy for
success, and achievement (self-reported 10-week grade). Chi-square tests were run to
examine the main effect of immigration status on intended college major and planned
career choice. Results are provided in Table 17 and 18. T–tests revealed a significant
effect for physics self-efficacy (t(247) = -1.989, p = 0.048, ES = -.3049), acculturation
(t(247) = 5.233, p < 0.05, ES = 0.7382) and enculturation (t(247) = -5.427, p < 0.05, ES =
-.9548). Since U.S. born Asian American students were coded as ‘0’ and foreign born
Asian American students as ‘1’, the two negative t –scores implied that the mean values
of U.S. born Asian American students’ physics self-efficacy and enculturation were less
than those of foreign born Asian American students. In addition, the positive t –score
79
showed that the mean value of foreign born Asian American students’ acculturation was
less than that of U.S. born Asian American students.
Table 17: t-test for Immigration Status Among Asian American Students (U.S.-born Asian American students
Coded as ‘0’ and Foreign Born Asian American Students as ‘1’) on Achievement, Expectancy-related Beliefs, and
Value-related Beliefs (n = 249)
t df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Cohen's D
if
significant
Acculturation
5.233 247 0.000 0.4997 0.0955 0.7382
Enculturation
-5.427 247 0.000 -0.6812 0.1060 -0.9548
Physics self-efficacy
-1.989 247 0.048 -0.1965 0.0988 -0.3049
Expectancy for success
-1.599 247 0.111 -0.2857 0.1787
Intrinsic interest value
-0.994 247 0.321 -0.2114 0.2155
Attainment value
-0.545 247 0.586 -0.0866 0.1588
Extrinsic utility value
-1.603 247 0.110 -0.3419 0.2133
Achievement
-0.390 247 0.697 -0.0503 0.1287
Table 18: chi-square test for Immigration Status Among Asian American Students (U.S.-born Asian American
students Coded as ‘0’ and Foreign Born Asian American Students as ‘1’) on Intended College Major and
Planned Career Choice (n = 249)
Pearson
Chi-
Square
N of Valid
Participants
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Phi value
Intended college major
13.13
a
249 3 0.726 0.073
Planned career choice
2.811
a
249 3 0.422 0.106
Note:
a
= 0 cell has expected count less than 5.
The positive significant effect of immigration status on acculturation indicated
that American-born Asian students were more willingly to blend into the American
culture than immigrant Asian students in a similar school setting. In addition, the
negative significant effect of generational status on enculturation indicated that
immigrant Asian students had a stronger Asian identification than American-born Asian
students did in the similar school setting. Since this study adopted AAMAS scale which
was designed to determine the degree of acculturation and enculturation of an Asian
American, these two findings were expected. Therefore, the main focus regarding
80
significant mean difference between American-born and immigrant Asian students was
the negative effect on physics self-efficacy for solving physics problems. It suggested
that immigrant Asian American students had a stronger physics self-efficacy as a group
than U.S.-born Asian American students had. Furthermore, there were no significant
differences found in value-related variables, achievement (self-reported 10-week grade),
intended college major, and planned career choice between the two groups.
Research Question Four
Research Question Four: Does the parental education level of an Asian American high
school student differ with respect to their acculturation/enculturation, self-efficacy,
success expectancies, intrinsic interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value,
achievement, college major and career choice?
A series of t-tests was run to examine the main effect of parental education level
on the following variables: acculturation, enculturation, physics self-efficacy, intrinsic
interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value, expectancy for success, and self-
reported 10-week grade as achievement. Chi-square tests were run to examine the main
effect of parental education level on intended college major and planned career choice.
Parental education level was divided into two levels: level 0 for parents without any
college degree and level 1 for parents with at least an AA degree. Results are provided in
Table 19 and 20. T-tests revealed a significant effect for expectancy for success (t(243) =
-2.055, p = 0.041, ES = -.2637) , acculturation (t(243) = -2.588 p = 0.010, ES = 0.3331)
and achievement (t(243) = -2.068 p = 0.040, ES = 0.2652). There were no significant
81
differences found in value-related variables, enculturation, intended college major, and
planned career choice.
Table 19: t-test for Parental Education Level Among Asian American Students (Parents Have Combined AA
degree or Above Coded as ‘1’ and Parents Without AA degree Coded as ‘0’) on Achievement, Expectancy-related
Beliefs, and Value-related Beliefs (n = 245)
t df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Cohen's D
if
significant
Acculturation
-2.588 243 0.010 -0.2233 0.8628 0.3331
Enculturation
1.054 243 0.293 0.1053 0.0999
Physics self-efficacy
-1.775 243 0.077 -0.1522 0.0857
Expectancy for success
-2.055 243 0.041 -0.3146 0.1531 -0.2637
Intrinsic interest value
-1.661 243 0.098 -0.3047 0.1834
Attainment value
-1.117 243 0.265 -0.1526 0.1367
Extrinsic utility value
-0.775 243 0.439 -0.1436 0.1852
Achievement
-2.068 243 0.040 -0.2276 -0.1101 -0.2652
Table 20: Chi-square test for Parental Education Level Among Asian American Students (Parents Have
Combined AA degree or above Coded as ‘1’ and Parents Without AA degree Coded as ‘0’) on Intended College
Major and Planned Career Choice (n = 245)
Pearson
Chi-
Square
N of Valid
Participants
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Phi value
Intended college major
1.762
a
245 3 0.623 0.085
Planned career choice
2.300
a
245 3 0.513 0.097
Note:
a
= 0 cell has expected count less than 5.
The significant effect of parental education level on expectancy for success
suggested that Asian American students whose parents had no college degree had a weaker
belief in succeeding in physics than Asian American students who came from family with
highly educated parents did. The significant effect of parental education level on
achievement predicted that Asian students whose parents had no college degree performed
lower in course grades than Asian students whose parents graduated from college. In
addition, the significant effect of parental education level on acculturation suggested that
82
parents having higher education levels can predict an Asian American student’s likely
readiness to acculturate to American culture.
Table 21: t-test for Paternal and Maternal Education Level Among Asian American Students (Parents Have
Combined AA degree or above Coded as ‘1’ and Parents Without AA degree) on Achievement, Expectancy-
related Beliefs, and Value-related Beliefs
T df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Cohen's D if
significant
Acculturation
Paternal
-2.139 243 0.033 -0.1885 0.0881 -0.2784
Maternal
-2.014 247 0.045 -0.1765 0.0877 -0.2615
Enculturation
Paternal
0.530 243 0.597 0.0539 0.1018
Maternal
1.654 247 0.099 0.1658 0.1002
Physics self-efficacy
Paternal
-1.161 243 0.247 -0.1015 0.0875
Maternal
-1.155 247 0.249 -0.0998 0.0864
Expectancy for success
Paternal
-1.726 243 0.086 -0.2693 0.1561
Maternal
-1.196 247 0.233 -0.1861 0.1556
Intrinsic interest value
Paternal
-1.368 243 0.173 -0.2556 0.1869
Maternal
-0.986 247 0.325 -0.1818 0.1844
Attainment value
Paternal
-1.196 243 0.233 -0.1662 0.1390
Maternal
-0.268 247 0.789 -0.0370 0.1381
Extrinsic utility value
Paternal
-1.547 243 0.123 -0.2904 0.1877
Maternal
-0.170 247 0.865 -0.316 0.1863
Achievement
Paternal
-1.210 243 0.227 -1.3625 0.1126
Maternal
-1.600 247 0.111 -0.1779 0.1112
In addition, comparing between Table 19 and 21, the effect on expectancy for
success and achievement by two highly educated parents (t(243) = -2.055, p = 0.041,
ES = -.2637 and t(243) = -2.068, p = 0.040, ES = -.2652 respectively in Table 19) have
dropped to insignificant values (t(243) = -1.726, p = 0.086 and t(247) = -1.196, p = 0.233
83
for paternal education level and t(243) = -1.210, p = 0.227 and t(247) = -1. 600, p = 0.111
for maternal education level) when only one parent had higher education. This suggested
that the possession of college degrees by both parents as a familial factor manifests a
higher likelihood that an Asian American physics student maintains a stronger self-
concept in succeeding in a physics course than an Asian American students whose
parents have only one college degree between them.
It is noteworthy when the similar t-tests and chi square tests were run for father or
mother individually (Table 21 and 22), the only main effect of paternal (t(243) = -2.139,
p = 0.033, ES = -.2784) or maternal (t(247) = -2.014, p = 0.045, ES = -.2615) education
level found was on acculturation. These findings suggested that the possession of a
college degree from either parent of an Asian American student can predict the student’s
higher degree of acculturation to American culture.
Table 22: Chi-square test for Paternal and Maternal Education Level Among Asian American Students (Parents
Have Combined AA degree or above Coded as ‘1’ and Parents Without AA degree) on Intended College Major
and Planned Career Choice
Pearson
Chi-
Square
N of Valid
Participants
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Phi value
Intended college major
Paternal
1.669
a
245 3 0.644 0.083
Maternal
1.748
a
249 3 0.626 0.084
Planned career choice
Paternal
2.462
a
245 3 0.482 0.100
Maternal
2.693
a
249 3 0.441 0.104
Note:
a
= 0 cell has expected count less than 5.
84
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
This chapter provides a summary of the study and a discussion of the main
findings. Implications for research and practitioners as well as recommendations for
future research are also explored, and then conclusions will be drawn to close this study.
Past literature demonstrates that females have been underrepresented in physics and
engineering throughout the STEM pipeline (Buse, 2011; Miller et al, 2006; NSF, 2011;
Stake, 2006; Taasoobshirazi & Carr, 2008). The underrepresentation was due to the
widespread belief of male mathematical superiority (Correll, 2001). These unfair
socialization processes linked to gender play a critical role for gender stereotypes and
math gender gap (Eccles, 1994, 2005). At high school, due to their past low performance
in elementary mathematics, many females do not choose to study challenging pre-college
course in mathematics as well as physics, and in turn, they do not offer themselves with
enough choices for their studies in college and career pathways. Consequently, these self-
doubts affect young females even with good grades in mathematics and science in
believing themselves successful in physics and engineering (Becker, 2010). Extensive
studies by Eccles and her colleagues (Eccles et al, 1983; Schunk et al., 2010; Wigfield &
Eccles, 2002) were conducted on upper elementary and junior high students measuring
their self-perceptions of expectancy for success and task value beliefs. Meanwhile, past
studies were also done on engineering students at college level about their achievement,
expectancy-related beliefs and value-related beliefs (Concannon & Barrow, 2009; Jones
et al., 2010). However, there is a gap in the current literature relating to high school
physics students by gender or Asian American minorities on their motivational and
85
sociocultural factors that affect females or Asian Americans in course-taking choice in
physics and career selection in physics or engineering.
The aim of this study is to investigate whether and to what extent the motivational
and sociocultural factors affect Asian American female high school students’ choices of
course-taking at high school, their intended major in college, and their intended career
goals at work fields. The aim is that these findings may better inform the personnel
serving this population. In this view, the motivational and sociocultural factors were
examined in four primary areas. First, it examined whether the gender of the students
related to their achievement (self-report 10-week grade), physics expectancy-related
beliefs (expectancy for success and self-efficacy), and value-related beliefs (intrinsic
interest value, attainment value, and extrinsic utility value), as well as plans in studying
in physics or engineering majors and working in physics and engineering fields. Second,
the study examined whether the ethnicity (Asian and non-Asian) of high school students
related to their achievement, physics expectancy-related beliefs, and value-related beliefs,
as well as plans in studying in physics or engineering majors and working in physics and
engineering fields. Third, among Asian American students, the study examined whether
their immigration status in the K-12 schoolings related to their acculturation,
enculturation, achievement, physics expectancy-related beliefs, and value-related beliefs,
as well as plans in studying in physics or engineering majors and working in physics and
engineering fields. Lastly, the study examined whether their parental education level
related to Asian American students’ acculturation, enculturation, achievement, physics
86
expectancy-related beliefs, and value-related beliefs, as well as plans in studying in
physics or engineering majors and working in physics and engineering fields.
Summary of the Study’s Findings
Frequency and Correlation Matrix Analysis
A frequency distribution study shows that the major proximal goal of the high
school physics students is to learn physics concepts in order to challenge themselves or to
prepare for college admission requirement and college coursework. This finding
demonstrates that most participants were motivated to take physics course and found a
utility value in taking the course to achieve their future goals. Moreover, in order to
replicate the previous findings on expectancy-related and value-related beliefs in the
domain of physics among students at high school level, three Pearson correlation matrix
tests on all the participants, females only and males only were performed. Results
revealed that without indication of causality, high school physics students’ physics
achievement, intended college major and planned career choice can be weakly predicted
by their expectancy-related beliefs (physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success) and
their value-related beliefs (intrinsic interest value, attainment value, and extrinsic utility
value).
Results from this study extend findings from past literature to the domain of
physics at high school level that motivational beliefs form strong correlation with
achievement and achievement-based future choices. Among all the correlated pairs,
intended college major and planned career choice had the strongest correlation to each
other while physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success in physics formed the
87
second strongest correlation pair. Meanwhile, parental education level has no correlation
with achievement, intended college major, planned career choice or any expectancy-value
beliefs among all high school physics participants in this study.
When a similar correlation test was run on male high school physics students, a
compatible pattern was found. Nonetheless, when the same test criteria were run on
female students, the findings did follow the trend of the previous two but not in an
absolute way. First, physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success in physics formed
the strongest correlation pair, followed by the correlation pair of intended college major
and planned career choice. Second, female high school students’ achievement in physics
is strongly predicted by their expectancy for success but weakly predicted by physics
self-efficacy and their value-related beliefs (intrinsic interest value, attainment value, and
extrinsic utility value). Female students’ achievement in physics is weakly correlated by
their choice of college major in physics and engineering fields but fails to predict their
planned career choice in physics or engineering fields. That is, the better academic
performance in physics a female student is, the more likely she will study in physics and
engineering at college level; however, grades in high school physics cannot precurse
female students’ planned career choice.
Third, female high school physics students’ intended college major and planned
career choice were weakly predicted by their expectancy-related beliefs (physics self-
efficacy and expectancy for success) and two of the three value-related beliefs (intrinsic
interest value and extrinsic utility value). Female students, however, do not picture that
the importance of doing well in physics (attainment value) can be related to their intended
88
college major and planned career choice at all. The outstanding independence between
achievement and future career choice in physics or engineering fields as well as
attainment value (the importance of doing well in physics) and future career choice in
physics or engineering fields extend the past studies about the self-doubts of females in
mathematics and math-intensive subjects. Even those female students who have strong
enough mathematics background and manage to take physics at high school level cannot
escape from such self-doubts. While almost 40% (105 out of 274) of the entire
participants were females, there was a disproportionate number of female students found
interests in studying and working in physics or engineering fields. These findings will be
further investigated below with the results of t-tests and chi-square tests on gender. Last
but not the least, consistent with the previous runs on all participants and male students
only, female students’ parental education level has no relationship with their
achievement, intended college major, planned career choice, or their expectancy-value
beliefs.
Effects on Expectancy-valued Beliefs, Achievement, and Acculturation /
Enculturation
Results of t-tests on gender extend the past studies to the domain of high school
physics that male students have a stronger physics self-efficacy in solving physics
problems and a higher expectancy for success in physics than female students have.
Results from t-tests also extend the past studies to the domain of Asian American
students’ immigration status that immigrant Asian American students have a stronger
physics self-efficacy in solving physics problems than American-born Asian students
89
have. Moreover, this study replicates the past studies that American-born Asian students
have a higher degree of acculturation to the American culture while immigrant Asian
American students maintain a higher degree of enculturation to their heritage culture.
Nonetheless, t-tests on immigration status of American Asian students found no
significant difference in their achievement in physics and value-related beliefs in physics.
There are no significant differences between Asian American high school students
and non-Asian American high school students or Chinese American students or non-
Chinese Asian American students in their achievement in physics, expectancy-related
beliefs in physics, or value-related beliefs in physics. Regarding the effect of parental
highest education level, Asian American students who have two highly educated parents
are predicted to have a higher expectancy for success in physics, achieve higher in course
grade, and maintain a higher degree of acculturation to the American culture than Asian
American students whose parents do not possess a college degree. However, for Asian
American students who have only a highly educated father or a highly educated mother
but not both, results from t-tests suggest that the only predictable event would be the
higher acculturation to the American culture. Lastly, there is no significant difference in
their enculturation and value-related beliefs in physics between Asian American students
whose parents having college degrees or not.
Effects on intended college major and planned career choice
A series of chi-square tests determined that there are significant gender effects on
physics students’ intended college major and planned career choice. The significant effect
of gender on both intended college major and planned career choice suggests that more
90
male students seek to study and work in physics and engineering fields than female
students do while more female students seek to study and work in non-science fields than
male students do. Finally, there is no significant difference found in their choice in
college major and plan in future career when comparing between Asian American
students and non-Asian American students, Chinese American students and non-Chinese
Asian American students, US-born Asian American students and immigrant Asian
American students, or Asian American parents having and not having a college degree.
Gender Effect on Expectancy-related Beliefs in Physics and Choice of Future Plans
According to expectancy-value theory (Wigfield & Eccles, 2002), achievement-
related choices, such as intended college major and planned career choice, can be
activated by a combination of success expectation and subjective value. Direct measures
on expectancy for success are often performed along with task values and self-efficacy
(Amerlink Creamer, 2010; Hazari et al., 2010; Jones et al., 2010). The present study
found there exists at least a weak bivariate correlation among achievement (self-report
10-week grade), choice of achievement tasks (intended college major and planned career
choice), expectancy-related beliefs (physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success) and
value-related beliefs (intrinsic interest value, attainment value, and extrinsic utility value)
in the domain of high school physics among students of both genders. Without indication
of causality, high school physics students’ achievement performance and choice of
achievement tasks are weakly predicted by their expectancy-related beliefs and their
value-related beliefs.
91
When gender was put into consideration to study its effect on achievement
performance, choice of achievement tasks, expectancy-related beliefs and value-related
beliefs, this study found that male high school students demonstrated their higher
expectancy for success and higher self-efficacy in the physics course than female high
school students did. As Bong and Skaalvik (2003) pointed out that the difference between
the expectancy for success (a form of self-concepts) and self-efficacy is on an individual
sense of his or her own competence (self-efficacy), or his or her competence in
comparison to others (self-concepts as expectancy for success). While the study used two
independent scales to measure physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success in
physics, self-efficacy showed its strong correlation with academic self-concept, in the
form of expectancy for success (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003; Jones et al., 2010).
Correlation analysis of this study extended past studies to the domain of high
school physics that expectancy-related beliefs (expectancy for success and self-efficacy)
serve as a good predictor for male and female students’ achievement (Jones et al., 2010).
That is, as long as a high school physics student of either gender has strong expectancy-
related beliefs in succeeding in physics, such beliefs can be used to predict the student’s
achievement in physics. Meanwhile, gender has no effect on achievement, which
suggests that both genders have identical capacity in studying physics.
Meanwhile, value-related constructs predict career plan for male and female
students (Jones et al., 2010). This study showed that the value-related beliefs (intrinsic
interest value, attainment value, extrinsic utility value) were correlated with future goals
of intended college major and planned career choice for all high school physics students.
92
The main difference between the two genders in intended college major and planned
career choice from this study indicated that more male students sought to study and work
in physics and engineering fields than female students did while more female students
sought to study and work in non-science fields than male students did. Correlation
analysis in this study further supported that intended college major and planned career
choice of female physics students can be predicted by their expectancy-related beliefs as
well as intrinsic interest value and extrinsic utility value. However, there was no
correlation between female physics students’ future academic or career goals and their
attainment value in studying physics. In summary, female students at high school level
perform equally as their male peers. They find it challenging to learn about the physics
contents but they do not find that the importance of doing well in physics (attainment
value) can be related to their intended college major and planned career choice in physics
and engineering fields.
Ethnicity Has No Effect on Achievement, Expectancy-value Related Beliefs in
Physics and Choice of Future Plans
The findings from this study suggested that in the domain of high school physics,
there is no difference found between Asian American students and non-Asian American
students or Chinese American students and non-Chinese Asian American students in their
self-report 10-week grade, expectancy for success, self-efficacy, intrinsic interest value,
attainment value, extrinsic utility value, intended college major and planned career
choice. As discussed in chapter two, there was no study on Asian American students in
93
the domain of physics at high school level before. A direct comparison with past studies
is then unavailable.
However, there were past studies on ethnicity in a different domain or in a
different grade level. For instance, Concannon and Barrow (2009) found that African
American students had significantly lower engineering career outcome expectations than
Caucasian students in an engineering program at a Midwestern university. The
insignificant difference between Asian American students and non-Asian American
students among all constructs tested in this study might be due to the sample population.
First, Hispanic American and Asian American students made up over 80% of Avery High
and Cannon High. Second, the study was based on 250 Asian American students and 24
non-Asian American students. The dominating headcount of Asian American students
took up 91% of the sample population under study. Because of the Asian ethnicity
dominance in the two campuses, especially in the physics classrooms, Asian American
students might render themselves a strong self concept of superiority, overcoming the
general belief of being a minority. Meanwhile, the remaining 13 Hispanic students and 9
Caucasian students could have well prepared in mathematics and science course
prerequisite before taking the physics course. Both the Caucasian and Hispanic groups’
strong academic preparation and Asian group’s self-concepts as being the majority in the
physics classroom nullified any differences between Asian American students and non-
Asian American students in their self-perceptions measured in this study.
94
Effect of Immigration Status on Self-efficacy in Physics as well as Acculturation and
Enculturation
This study indicated that American-born Asian students were more readily to
adapt the American culture than immigrant Asian American students in a similar school
setting. Meanwhile, immigrant Asian students had a stronger Asian identification than
their American-born Asian peers did in the similar school setting. These are not
surprising findings as scales to measure acculturation and enculturation are meant to
contrast the difference in the generational status (Chung et al., 2004). In fact, among all
findings having significant differences, the effect sizes for acculturation and enculturation
between foreign-born and U.S.-born Asian American students were the two greatest
values (over 0.70), compared to the effect size of the other findings in this study which in
average ran mildly between 0.3 and 0.4.
A single most important finding from this study was that foreign-born Asian
American students had a stronger physics self-efficacy as a group than domestic-born
Asian American students had. To the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to assess
within-group differences in motivational constructs among Asian American students in
the domain of high school physics. A direct comparison with past studies is then
unavailable. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences found in expectancy for
success in physics, achievement, value-related beliefs, as well as intended college major
and planned career choice. As having discussed in chapter two, under typical
motivational situations, perceived self-efficacy correlates strongly with academic self-
95
concept, that is, expectancy for success, and in turn, academic self-efficacy should serve
as an active precursor of academic self-concept (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003).
The independence between physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success in
physics among Asian American students of immigration status differentiated an
individual sense of his or her own competence (self-efficacy) from his or her competence
in comparison to others (expectancy for success) (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). The author
proposes that this differentiation is due to the combined degree of acculturation and
enculturation among Asian American students of different immigration status. The higher
degree of acculturation to the American (western) culture that an Asian American student
has, the stronger sense of individualism he or she maintains. Meanwhile, the higher
degree of enculturation to the Asian (oriental) culture that an Asian American student
has, the stronger sense of collectivism he or she achieves. In western societies, where
self-perception of competence is closely tied to students’ sense of self-worth, students
display a tendency to ability attribution for academic success and effort attribution for
academic failure so as to avoid threats to their self-worth (Ho, 2004). In contrast, in the
Asian culture, where achievement through hard work is more highly valued than
achievement through ability, Asian students of all ages attribute both academic success
and failure more to effort than ability. In the western context, U.S- born Asian students
have a stronger perception to avoid threats to their self-worth. In contrast, in the
collectivistic Asian context, where there is general consensus about the importance of
academic achievement, foreign born Asian American students are expected to strive to
meet the same standards and maintain a relatively higher physics self-efficacy in solving
96
physics problems. In this view, the cultural difference between the East and the West
affects the perceptions of self-competence of an Asian American student of immigration
status.
Parental Educational Level of an Asian American Student Has Effect on
Achievement, Expectancy for Success and Acculturation
While the study itself has its primary focus on how cognitive processes
(interpretations and attributions for past events and perceptions of social environment) of
an individual manifests his or her motivational and sociocultural beliefs, familial
influences such as parental education background and home environment undeniably play
a pivotal role in shaping a student’s behavior and performance in school (Schunk et al.,
2010). This study suggests that among all high school physics students, there was no
correlation of parental education level with achievement, motivational beliefs, and their
choice of future academic and career plans. However, when the lens is focused only on
Asian American students, significant mean differences between parents having college
degree and parents without college degree are found. Asian American students whose
parents had no college degree scored a lower grade in physics than Asian American
students who came from family with highly educated parents did.
In addition, this study found that Asian American students whose parents had no
college degree had a lower expectancy for success in physics than Asian American
students who came from family with highly educated parents did. Expectancies for
success which are beliefs of an individual about how well he or she will do on an
upcoming task are usually affected by his or her proximal and distal goals (Wigfield and
97
Eccles, 2002). Often student, Asian American or not, conceptualizes his or her goals
based on the people and the environment he or she encounters. Within the home
environment, if his or her parent does not offer and support their beliefs in attributions for
the student’s school performance, values for schoolwork or actual achievement standards
to influence the student’s motivational beliefs as well as proximal and distal goals, the
student may develop a low expectancy for success based on the familial support he or she
perceives from home (Eccles et al., 1998; Schunk et al., 2010).
Finally, this study found that there was a significant positive effect on
acculturation if one of the two or both parents had a college degree compared to both
parents having no degrees. These suggested that the college degree of at least one highly
educated parent can be used to predict a higher degree of acculturation to the American
culture for the Asian American students.
Last but not the least, past studies have suggested that acculturation/enculturation
and parental educational level should manifest the students’ beliefs more than this study
found. For instance, Suinn (2010) purported that high identification with the Asian
culture of origin was associated with high academic motivation and achievement among
Chinese American high school students. In fact, high SAT scores were also linked to high
enculturation to the Asian culture of origin. The source of enculturation must originate
from Asian American students’ home and their parents. In addition, high achieving
children had aspiring parents who motivated their children to perform better academically
and to realize goals toward higher education (Suinn, 2010). All these missing links
between parental educational level and enculturation or between enculturation and
98
achievement as well as achievement-based future choices found in this study would
require additional investigation in the future.
Implications for Research and Practitioners
Implications for Research
The findings from this study have implications for research on female high school
physics students’ motivation to their academic achievement, intended college major and
planned career choice in the physics and engineering fields. This study replicates and
extends the past findings on expectancy-related and value-related beliefs into the domain
of physics among students at high school level. It also provides additional findings to
support the growing body of evidence suggesting that even a comparable number of
female students choose to study physics in high school, there is a vast reduction of female
students who elect to study and work in physics and engineering fields once they
graduate from high school. Thus, this study provides confirmation of the
underrepresentation of females in STEM pipeline and encircles a possible point of
leakage along the pipeline. Future studies can investigate to the earlier grades such as
sixth to eighth grade to examine the formation process of self-concepts and career
interests perceived by female students so that proper intervention could be suggested.
Furthermore, this study provides extension to the growing body of evidence that
immigration status and parental support as a form of parental educational level pose an
effect on Asian American students in their academic achievement, intended college major
and planned career choice. This study is the first study to provide quantitative evidence in
terms of descriptive and inferential statistics to predict achievement, intended college
99
major and planned career choice, expectancy-related beliefs and value-related beliefs by
Asian American students’ immigration status and parental education level in the domain
of high school physics.
Implications for Practitioners and Stakeholders
This study provides evidence that high school is the crossroads for students,
females and males, Asian Americans and Americans of other ethnicities to explore and
prepare for the higher education and career pathways of their choice. In particular, there
is comparable number of female students in high school physics classrooms, who have
adequate background in mathematics, but bypass the choice of continuing their studies in
physics and engineering at college level. This is one of the reasons why there is a
shortage in the STEM pipeline. The discrepancy found in this study is caused by
sociocultural biases and low motivational beliefs that affect the female students’ choices
for their future. Many messages female students receive from parents, teachers, and peers
in K-12 settings discourage them from pursuing math-intensive and physics-related
degrees in college (Becker, 2010; Stout et al., 2011). Capability difference between
female students and male students is not the reason as suggested by the findings in this
study. The gap is due to the belief of male mathematical superiority in our culture
(Correll, 2001).In order to modify an individual’s personal beliefs whose aim is to change
the individual’s behavior, Bandura (1986) suggested the key is to modify the personal-
environmental interaction under his framework of triadic reciprocality. Therefore,
instead of changing the female students’ perceptions, the remedy should be initiated by
their significant others at home, in class and on school campus. The role of parents,
100
teachers, counselors and administrators on affecting female students in studying physics
are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Parents. The study found that parental education level can predict students’
expectancy for success as well as their academic achievement. However, it does not mean
that highly educated parents quit their job and dedicate all their daily effort to their
children’s academic success. Rather, past studies showed that children whose homes had
greater cognitive stimulation displayed higher academic motivation (Schunk et al, 2010).
It might be due to the homes in which parents did not complete college degree are also
homes of low socioeconomic status; low-income or less educated parents do not have or
understand the proper resources to cognitively stimulate their children. Eccles et al.
(1998) purported that parents should maintain their parental beliefs that can influence
children’s motivation beliefs. These parental beliefs include (1) attributions for the
child’s school performance, (2) perceptions of the task difficulty of schoolwork, (3)
expectations and confidence in children’s abilities, (4) values for schoolwork, (5) actual
achievement standards, and (6) beliefs about barriers to success and strategies for
overcoming these barriers. In particular, parents should demonstrate an unbiased and
encouraging attitude when expressing their expectations on children’s ability and choice
of future goals. Improper comment that leads to bias due to their children’s gender should
be avoided. In addition, parents can be involved in their children’s schooling to
ameliorate their academic motivation. The most common ways are to engage with their
children homework and projects, meet with their teachers, participate in school events,
volunteer at the school, help their children with course selection, and impart their
101
educational values to children. Last but not the least, past studies suggested that father
involvement both in or out of school is as significant as mother’s involvement and relates
directly to children’s motivation and achievement (Gonzalez-DeHass et al, 2005; Schunk
et al., 2010).
Physics Teachers. Subject teachers who teach physics and mathematics play a
pivotal role of shaping the self-concepts of students, especially female students. Jones et
al. (2010) suggested that expectancy-related beliefs serve as a good predictor for
students’ achievement while value-related beliefs predict career plan. This study extends
these findings. Past research shows that male students prefer learning abstract concepts
(Zhu, 2007) while female student prefer a more conversational and collaborative learning
environment (Beutel & Johnson, 2004). Physics teachers can ameliorate female students’
physics self-efficacy by accommodating a more conversational and collaborative learning
environment, providing curriculum whose aim is to improve female students’ positive
mastery experiences, and furnishing an adaptive rubrics system in equally assessing
students of the two genders as well as different ethnical and cultural background. In
addition, in order to close the self identity gap in physics between the two genders, high
school physics teacher can focus on conceptual understanding, conduct labs that address
students’ beliefs about the world, discuss relevant real-life science, discuss about the
benefits of being a scientist, and encourage students to take science classes (Hazari et al.,
2010).
Furthermore, teachers’ beliefs, such as about their teaching abilities and their
students’ learning capabilities, influence their relations with students (Davis, 2003). In
102
particular, teacher expectations can act as self-fulfilling prophecies because student
achievement comes to reflect these expectations (Schunk et al., 2010). Usually in most
high schools, there is only one physics teacher. High school physics teachers should go
beyond their routine schedule in order to look for frequent collaborations with colleagues
of the same subject. For instance, physics teachers can attend workshops or meetings
organized by the local chapter of American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT).
They should also volunteer in student activities, participate in professional development
and yearly conference in physics whose aim is to broaden and refresh their own teaching
efficacy.
Counselors. Academic counselors and staff at career center can play a vital role
in recruiting underrepresented minority groups to study physics and explore the potential
career path in physics and engineering. To start with, counselors and school staff who
interact with female students should avoid from making negative comments that would
discourage female students from pursuing math-intensive and physics-related degrees in
college (Becker, 2010; Stout et al., 2011). In addition, providing social persuasions and
vicarious experiences can enhance physics self-efficacy of female students (Zhu, 2007).
Therefore, since counselors can better offer a comprehensive assessment of the students’
capability and goals than subject teachers who are only focused in their own subject
domain, academic counselors can serve as a good provider of social persuasions to
female students. Meanwhile, career center can arrange alumnae studying at college or
working in the fields of physics or engineering to discuss about their life and challenges
they encounter at school and at workplace. These vicarious experiences that the alumnae
103
bring to the fellow female students can improve their self-efficacy as well as their
expectancy for success in becoming a female physicist or engineer.
Administrators. District superintendent and school principals should provide
support to students, parents, teachers and counselors in the elimination of the belief of
male mathematical superiority in our culture. School principals can work with Parents-
Teachers-Students Association (PTSA) of their schools to offer seminars on topics that
would assist parents in understanding their important roles in involving students’ school
work and choosing college majors as well as career paths. High school principals can
allocate resources to provide physics teacher with in-service training or professional
development based on evidence research in motivating students of both genders to
succeed in physics and engineering fields. Lastly, principals and assistant principals
should work closely with science department chairman and academic counselors to offer
enough physics classes in order to satisfy the needs and interests the students.
Recommendations for Future Research
The following is a discussion of recommendations for future research aimed at
understanding how to increase high school female students’ motivation to achieve higher
grade in physics and to choose physics or engineering as their college major as well as
lifetime career. First of all, this is one of the few studies that focused on female high
school students on their achievement in high school physics and their intended choice of
academic and career goals. The data collection was done in one time and comparisons
were made between different groups, such as male and female or Asian American and
non-Asian American. Future research can be a longitudinal type, in which data can be
104
collected at the beginning and at the end of a school year to observe changes between
groups and within groups. One key variable that can be included in such extended study
is persistence of a student. The difference in persistence between students of both genders
can be analyzed and render a more insightful understanding between the genders at high
school level over the domain of physics and a clearer picture of students’ actual
commitment to their plans of college major and career choice. In addition, the
achievement variable in this study could be more reliable if the actual semester grades or
scores in the physics subject test of California Standardized Tests could be used instead
of self-reported data. Furthermore, the data of the present or future studies can be used to
examine whether clusters of items form factors that represent outcomes more efficiently
than individual variables. Meanwhile, path analysis can be adopted to examine the
direction of relationships between the variables studied and structural equation modeling
(SEM) can be implemented to illustrate the results in a graphical representation of the
relationship between all the factors under consideration.
It is also noteworthy that this study did not find any differences between Asian
American students and non-Asian American students or Chinese American students and
non-Chinese Asian American students at high school physics level in their achievement,
choices of their intended college and career goals, expectancy-related beliefs and value-
related beliefs. In order to extend the present study on Asian American high school
students, future research should recruit the sample population in schools where Asian
American students, particularly female, are minority group. From such future study,
researchers can further disaggregate the Asian student population, acquire a more diverse
105
sample population and have a better comparison of acculturation and enculturation effect
for Asian American students when they belong to a majority group versus their presence
as a minority group in a high school setting.
Last but not the least, this study found that there was no correlation among all
participants of parental education level with any other variables measured. However,
when the focus was narrowed down to Asian American students, there was effect of
parental education level on achievement, expectancy for success and acculturation found.
Future research can adopt a more comprehensive scale to expand the study of other
parental or familial factors, such as perceived parenting style, perceived parents’
expectation on children’s major in college, and household income, that may play a
pivotal role on the achievement and choices of intended academic and career goals of
female students and Asian American students. Future study can also examine whether the
factors can be generalized to other minority groups in order to encourage more females
from other minority groups to study physics or engineering in college.
Conclusions
This study investigated whether and to what extent the motivational and
sociocultural factors affect female Asian American high school physics students’
achievement, their intended major in college, and their intended career goals at work
fields. In particular, this study revealed several findings that are consistent with past
research. First, this study replicated past findings that achievement-related choices can be
activated by a combination of success expectation and subjective value. Physics course
grade in this study was predicted by students’ expectancy-related beliefs. Second, value-
106
related beliefs (intrinsic interest value, attainment value, and extrinsic utility value) and
expectancy-related beliefs (physics self-efficacy and expectancy for success) served as a
good predictor of students’ indented college major and planned career choice. In addition,
there was a main effect of gender found on expectancy-related beliefs, choice of intended
college major and planned career choice.
This study validated past research work that there is a main effect of Asian
American students of different immigration status on their acculturation and
enculturation. In addition, this study extended past research work to the domain of high
school physics that immigration status of Asian American students has a main effect on
students’ physics self-efficacy for solving physics problems. The study also replicated
that students’ achievement and expectancy for success in physics can be predicted by
their parental education level. It is in the hope that these findings provided deeper insight
in understanding the motivational and sociocultural factors that affect female Asian
American high schoolers in order to enhance their higher interests and participation rate
in physics as well as to increase the headcount to study and work in physics and
engineering fields.
107
REFERENCES
Adelman, C. (1998). Women and men of the engineering path: A model for analysis of
undergraduate careers. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education and the
National Institute for Science Education.
Amelink, C. T., & Creamer, E. G. (2010). Gender differences in elements of the
undergraduate experience that influence satisfaction with the engineering major
and the intent to pursue engineering as a career. Journal of Engineering
Education, 99(1), 81-92.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychological
Review, 64, 359-372.
Atkinson, R.C. (1990). Supply and demand for scientists and engineers: A national crisis
in the making. Science, New Series, 248(4954), 425-432.
Augustine, N. R. (2007). Is America falling off the Flat Earth? Retrieved from
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12021.html
Ayalon, H. (2003). Women and men go to university: Mathematical background and
gender differences in choice of field in higher education. Sex Roles, 48(5/6), 277-
290.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human
behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In T. Urdan and F.
Parajes (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-337). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Becker, F. S. (2010). Why don’t young people want to become engineers? Rational
reasons for disappointing decisions. European Journal of Engineering Education,
35(4), 349-366.
Beutel, A. M., & Johnson, M. K. (2004). Gender and prosocial values during
adolescence: A research note. The Sociological Quarterly, 45(2), 379-393.
108
Bong, M. & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How
different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1-40.
Britner, S. L. & Parajes, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle
school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 485-499.
Brown, A.S. (2009). What engineering shortage? Engineering Management Review,
IEEE, 37(4), 93-99. doi: 10.1109/EMR.2009.5384056
Buri, J. R. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment,
57, 110-119.
Buse, K. R. (2011). Why they stay: Individual factors predicting career commitment for
women engineers (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
http://weatherhead.case.edu/degrees/doctor-
management/research/files/year3/Buse%20Quant%20Paper%20Jan2011v2.pdf
Caliskan, S., Selcuk, G. S., & Erol, M. (2007). Development of physics self-efficacy
scale. In S. A. Cetin and I. Hikmet (Chairs), Paper presented at the Sixth
International Conference of the Balkan Physical Union, pp 483-484.
Callahan, J. F., Clark, L. H, & Kellough, R. D. (1998). Middle and secondary school
students: Meeting the challenge. Teaching in the middle and secondary schools,
6
th
ed., 65-67. Frontin, NJ: Simon and Schuster Company
Chung, R. H. G., Kim, B. S. K., & Abreu, J. M. (2004). Asian American
Multidimensional Acculturation Scale: Development, factor analysis, reliability,
and validity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10, 66-80.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2
nd
ed. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology. (2009). STEMtrends: Science,
technology, engineering, mathematics. Washington, D.C: Commission on
Professionals in Science and Technology.
Concannon, J. P. & Barrow, L. H. (2009). A cross-sectional study of engineering
students' self-efficacy by gender, ethnicity, year, and transfer status. Journal of
Science Educational Technology, 18, 163-172. doi: 10.1007/s10956-008-9141-3
Concannon, J. P., & Barrow, L. H. (2010). Men's and women's intentions to persist in
undergraduate engineering degree programs. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 19(2), 133-145. doi: 10.1007/s10956-009-9187-x
109
Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-
assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1691-1730.
Correll, S. J. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career
aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69(1), 93-113.
Crocker, J., Karpinski, A., Quinn, D. M., & Chase, S. K. (2003). When grades determine
self-worth: Consequences of contingent self-worth for male and female
engineering and psychology majors. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 85(3), 507-516.
Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student-teacher
relationships on children’s social and cognitive development. Educational
Psychologist, 38, 207-334.
Donnelly, P. (2002, July 22). H-1B is just another gov’t. subsidy. ComputerWorld
Careers. Retrieved from
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/72848/H_1B_Is_Just_Another_Gov_t._
Subsidy?taxonomyId=010
Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(4), 585-609.
Eccles, J. S. (2005). Studying gender and ethnic differences in participation in math,
physical science, and information technology. In J. E. Jacobs & S. D. Simpkins
(Eds.), Leaks in the pipeline to math, science, and technology careers, pp.7-14.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Eccles, J. S. (2007). Where are all the women? Gender differences in participation in
physical science and engineering. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why
aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp.199-
210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Eccles, J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life: Personal and
collective identities as motivators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 78-
89.
Eccles (Parsons), J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J.
L, & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T.
Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp.75-146). San
Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.
110
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of
adolescents' achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personal
Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215-225.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon
(Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3,
Social, emotional, and personality development (5
th
ed., pp. 1017-1095). New
York: Wiley.
Ehrenberg, R.G. (2010). Analyzing the factors that influence persistence rates in STEM
field, majors: Introduction to the symposium. Economics of Education Review,
29, 888-891.
Freeman, C. E. (2004). Trends in educational equity of girls & women: 2004. U.S.
Department of Education: National Center for Education Statistics. 2005-016.
Fryer, R. G., & Levitt, S. D. (2010). An empirical analysis of the gender gap in
mathematics. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(2), 210-240.
Furnham, A. Reeves, E., & Budhani, S. (2002). Parents think their sons are brighter than
their daughters: Sex differences in parental self-estimations and estimations of
their children's multiple intelligences. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(1),
24-39.
Gates, B. (2007, March 7). Interview by United States Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions. Strengthening American competitiveness for the
21
st
century [Interview transcript]. Retrieved from Microsoft News Center Web
site: http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/exec/billg/speeches/2007/03-
07Senate.mspx
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and
reference. 11
th
edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Publishing.
Goldin, C., Katz, L. F., & Kuziemko, I. (2006). The homecoming of American college
women: The reversal of the college gender gap. Journal of Economic Perspecitve,
20(4), 133-156.
Gonzalez-DeHass, A. R., Willems, P. P. & Doan Holbein, M. F. (2005). Examining the
relationship between parental involvement and student motivation. Educational
Psychology Review, 17, 99-123.
Griffith, A. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the
school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 935-946.
111
Griswold, D. (1998, March 30). Let high-tech workers in! Retrieved from The Cato
Institute Web site: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5922
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of
women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18, 326-336.
Hazari, Z., Tai, R. H., & Sadler, P. M. (2007). Gender differences in introductory
university physics performance: The influence of high school physics preparation
and affective factors. Science Education, 91(6), 843-876.
Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M.C. (2010). Connecting high school
physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career
choice: A gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978-
1003.
Hewlett, S. A., Luce, C. B., Servon, L. J., Sherbin, L., Shiller, P., Sosnovich, E., &
Sumberg, K. (2008). The Athena factor: Reversing the brain drain in science,
engineering, and technology. Harvard Business Review Research Report 10094.
Hira, R. (2007, March). Outsourcing America's technology and knowledge jobs: High-
skill guest worker visas are currently hurting rather than help keep jobs at home.
(EPI Briefing Paper #187). Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Hira, R. (2010). U.S. policy and the STEM workforce system. American Behavioral
Scientist, 53(7), 949-961. doi: 10.1177/0002764209356230
Ho, I. T. (2004). A comparison of Australia and Chinese teachers’ attributions for student
problem behaviors. Educational Pscyhology, 24(3), 375-391.
Hunt, J. (2010). Why do women leave science and engineering? (NBER working paper
no. 15853). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved
from http://www.nber.org/papers/w15853
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA. (2010, May 18). IEEE-USA
proposes employment-based immigration reform legislation. Retrieved from
http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/issues/Immigration/model-bill.asp
Jacobs, J. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Parents, task values, and real-life achievement-
related choices. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.) Intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp.405-439).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
112
Jones, B. D., Paretti, M. C., Hein, S. F., & Knott, T. W. (2010). An analysis of motivation
constructs with first-year engineering students: Relationships among
expectancies, values, achievement, and career plans. Journal of Engineering
Education, 99(4), 319-336.
Kelly, T. K., Butz, W. P., Carroll, S., Adamson, D. M., & Bloom, G. (2004). The U.S.
Scientific and Technical Workforce: Improving Data for Decisionmaking.
Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedings/CF194.html
Lawrenz, F., Wood, N. B., Kirchhoff, A., Kim, N. K., & Eisenkraft, A. (2009). Variables
affecting physics achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(9),
961-976.
Lee, R. M., Yoon, E., & Liu-Tom, H. T. (2006). Structure and measurement of
acculturation/enculturation for Asian Americans using the ARSMA-II.
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 39(1), 42-55.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive
theory of career and academic interest, choice, and perforamnce [Monograph].
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79-122.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Schmidt, J., Brenner, B., Lyons, H., & Treistman, D. (2003).
Relation of contextual supports and barriers to choice behavior in engineering
majors: Test of alternative social cognitive models. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 50(4), 458-465.
Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A. (1996). Latent structure of the
sources of mathematics self-efficacy. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 292-
308.
Lindsay, L., & Salzman, H. (2007, October 29). Into the eye of the storm: Assessing the
evidence on science and engineering education, quality, and workforce demand.
Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=411562
Lindsey, B.L., Salzman, H., Berstien, H., & Henderson, E. (2009). Steady as she goes?
Three generations of students through the sciences and engineering pipeline.
Institute for the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University,
Heldrich Center for Workforce, Rutgers University, and The Urban Institute.
Retrieved from
http://www.heldrich.rutgers.edu/uploadedFiles/Publications/STEM_Paper_Final.p
df.
113
Lowell, B. L. & Salzman, H. (2007). Into the eye of the storm: Assessing the evidence on
science and engineering education, quality, and workforce demand. Urban
Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/publications/411562.html
Matusovich, H. M., Streveler, R. A., & Miller, R. L. (2010). Why do students choose
engineering? A qualitative, longitudinal investigation of students’ motivational
values. Journal of Engineering Education, Oct., 289-303.
May, G. S., & Chubin, D. E. (2003). A retrospective on undergraduate engineering
success for underrepresented minority students. Journal of Engineering
Education, 92(1), 27.
Miller, P. H., Blessing, J. S., & Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender differences in high school
students’ views about science. International Journal of Science Education, 28,
363-381.
Moore, S. (1998, September 24). Immigration reform means more high-tech jobs.
Retrieved from The Cato Institute Web site:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5814
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering and Institute of
Medicine. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing
Americans for a brighter future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2000). Forecasting demand and supply of doctoral scientists
and engineers: Report of a workshop on methodology. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press.
National Science Foundation. (2004). Women, minorities, and person with disabilities in
science and engineering: 2004. Retrieved from
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/pdf/nsf04317.pdf
National Science Foundation. (2011). Women, minorities, and person with disabilities in
science and engineering: 2011. Retrieved from
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
Norman, R. A., (2007). Is America falling off the flat earth? Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
Ost, B. (2010). The role of peers and grades in determining major persistence in the
sciences. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 923-934.
doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.06.011
114
Park, Y. S., Kim, B. S. K., Chiang, J., & Ju. C. M. (2010). Acculturation, enculturation,
parental adherence to Asian cultural values, parenting styles, and family conflict
among Asian American college students. Asian American Journal of Psychology,
1(1), 67-79.
Patel, P., Bohorquez, R., & Scott, C. (2007). Market alert: Engineering and project
management shortage likely to severely affect development costs and viability
(CERA Special Report, 2007, September 13).
Piaget, J. (1997). Development and learning. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings
on the Development of Children (pp. 19-280). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman
and Company.
Price, J. (2010). The effect of instructor race and gender on student persisitence in STEM
fields. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 901-910.
doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.07.009
Rajan, S., & Krome, J. (2008, September). Intelligent oil field of the future: Will the
future be too late? Paper presented at the 2008 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Denver, CO.
Rosser, S., & Taylor, M. (2009). Why Are We Still Worried about Women in Science?
Academe, 95(3), 7-10. Retrieved March 1, 2011, from Education Module.
(Document ID: 1738940061).
Santrock, J. W. (2009) Life-span Development (12
th
ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2010). Motivation in Education: Theory,
Research and Applications (3
rd
ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Stake, J. E. (2006). The critical mediating role of social encouragement for science
motivation and confidence among high school girls and boys. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 36, 1017-1045.
Steffens, M. C., Jelenec, P., & Noack, P. (2010). On the leaky math pipeline: Comparing
implicit math-gender stereotypes and math withdrawal in female and male
children and adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 947-963.
doi: 10.1037/a0019920
Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (2011). Steming the tide:
Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 100(2), 255-270.
115
Suinn, R. M. (2009). Reviewing acculturation and Asian Americans: How acculturation
affects health, adjustment, school achievement, and counseling. Asian American
Journal of Psychology, 1(1), 5-17.
Taasoobshirazi, G., & Carr, M. (2008). Gender differences in science: An expertise
perspective. Education Psychology Review, 20, 149-169. doi: 10.1007/s10648-
007-9067-y
Teitelaum, M. S. (2003). Do we need more scientists? The Public Interest, 153(Fall), 40-
53.
Vest, C.M. (2006). Educating engineers for 2020 and beyond. The Bridge, National
Academy of Engineerng, 36(2), 38-44.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs,
expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through
adolescence. In A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement
motivation (pp. 91-120). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Yergin, D. (2008, May 28). Oil has reached a turning point. Financial Times, pp. 9.
Zhu, Z. (2007). Learning content, physics self-efficacy, and female students' physics
course-taking. International Education Journal, 8(2), 204-212.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1996). Misconceptions, problems, and dimensions in measuring self-
efficacy, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, New York.
116
APPENDIX A:
Demographics Questions and Measurement Scales (62 items)
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
APPENDIX B:
Parental Consent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4031
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
PARENTAL PERMISSION
Sociocultural and Motivational Factors Affecting Students’ Choice of Studying Physics
and Engineering
Your child is invited to participate in a research study conducted by Saliha Sha, MA
Education and MSEE, and Dr. Hirabayashi, Ph. D. from the University of Southern
California because your child is currently taking a high school physics course. Your
child’s participation is voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask
questions about anything you do not understand before deciding whether to allow your
child to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. Your
child will also be asked his/her permission and given a form to read, which is called an
assent form. Your child can decline to participate, even if you agree to allow him/her.
Your child may also decide to discuss it with your family or friends. If your child decide
to participate, you will be asked to sign this form, and your child be asked to sign the
assent form. You will be given a copy of this form.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study is to learn more about the factors affecting the high school
students’ choice in taking physics at high school and eventually in studying physics or
engineering at college.
STUDY PROCEDURES
If you agree to allow your child to participate, we would ask your child to do the
followings: complete a 60-question survey about your confidence, interest and values to
study and complete a high school physics course. The date for the survey will be on
[date] after the first ten weeks of Fall semester 2011. Your child can take the survey
home and return the completed survey to his/her physics teacher in three days. If the child
125
misses the date, he/she can also take the survey in the [school auditorium] during lunch
on [date]. It will take approximately 25 minutes to complete.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
The risks from participating in this study may include possible negative feelings
associated with your child reporting about his or her confidence, interest, and values
relating to studying in physics. Generally speaking, it is unlikely that your child may
suffer any discomfort from completing the surveys.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There may be specific benefits which your child can realize his or her potential interests
in science and engineering, pursue such interests further in college, and determine that
science and engineering would be a possible lifetime career. In addition, the findings
from this study may provide policymakers to develop laws and educational practitioners
to develop program that would help high school students, male and female, engage in
more inquiry activities about science subjects.
POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The investigator of this research does not have any known conflict of interest that may
compromise the integrity of the research.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will be disclosed only
with your permission or as required by law. The members of the research team and the
University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may
access the data. Neither your parent nor anyone in the school will have access to your
responses.
These data will be stored in the investigator’s office in a password protected computer. In
order to maintain the identity confidentiality of your child, an identification number will
be assigned and used to represent your child. All data connected to your child will
include only this identification number. The researcher will be the only individual who
will have access to the documents connecting to the correspondence between the
identification number and your child’s name. These data, both electronic and paper, will
be stored for three years upon the completion of the study and then destroyed.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be included that would reveal your child’s identity. No photographs,
videos, or audio-tape recordings of your child will be used in this study.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
126
Your child’s participation is voluntary. Your child’s refusal to participate will involve no
penalty or loss of benefits to which you or your child are otherwise entitled. You may
withdraw your consent, and your child may draw his/her assent, at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You, or your child, are not waiving any legal
claims, rights or remedies because of your child’s participation in this research study.
INVESTIGATORS CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Saliha Sha, at SSha@usc.edu or Dr. Hirabayashi, Ph.D. at (213) 740-3470.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant
you may contact the IRB directly at the information provided below. If you have
questions, concerns, complaints about the research and are unable to contact the research
team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of the research team, please contact
the University Park IRB (UPIRB), Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement,
Stonier Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu.
SIGNATURE OF PARENT(S)
I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions.
My questions have been answered to my/our satisfaction, and I agree to have my child
participate in this study. I have been given a copy of this form.
Name of Participant
Name of Parent
Signature of Parent Date
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
127
I have explained the research to the participant and his/her parent(s), and answered all of
their questions. I believe that the parent(s) understand the information described in this
document and freely consents to participate.
Name of Person Obtaining Consent
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date
128
APPENDIX C:
Youth Assent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4031
ASSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
FOR YOUTH (AGES 12-17)
Sociocultural and Motivational Factors Affecting Students’ Choice of Studying Physics
and Engineering
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Saliha Sha, MA Education
and MSEE, and Dr. Hirabayashi, Ph.D. at the University of Southern California, because
you are currently taking a high school physics course. Your participation is voluntary.
You should read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not
understand, before deciding whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need
to read this form. You may also decide to discuss it with your family or friends. If you
agree to participate, you will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this
form.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study is to learn more about the factors affecting the high school
students’ choice in taking physics at high school and eventually in studying physics or
engineering at college.
STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to do the following:
complete a 62-question survey about your confidence, interest and values to study and
complete a high school physics course. The date for the survey will be on [date] after the
first ten weeks of Fall semester 2011. You can take the survey home and return to your
physics teacher in three days. You may also elect to take the survey online at
qualtrics.com. If you miss the date, you can also take the survey in your [school
auditorium] during lunch on [date]. It will take approximately 30 minutes to complete.
In order to encourage your participation, a lottery will be drawn from all participants who
return a complete survey for ten $20 Amazon gift card.
129
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
The risks from participating in this study may include possible negative feelings
associated with reporting about your confidence, interest, and values relating to studying
in physics. Generally speaking, it is unlikely that you may suffer any discomfort from
completing the survey.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There may be specific benefits which you can realize your potential interests in physics
and engineering, pursue such interests further in college, and determine that physics and
engineering would be a possible lifetime career. In addition, the findings from this study
may provide policymakers to develop laws and educational practitioners to develop
programs that would help high school students, male and female, engage in more inquiry
activities about science subjects.
POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The investigator of this research does not have any known conflict of interest that may
compromise the integrity of the research.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will be disclosed only
with your permission or as required by law. The members of the research team and the
University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may
access the data. Neither your parent nor anyone in the school will have access to your
responses.
The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of
research subjects.
These data will be stored in the investigator’s office in a password protected computer. In
order to maintain your identity confidentiality, an identification number will be assigned
and used to represent your identity. All data connected to you will include only this
identification number. The researcher will be the only individual who will have access to
the documents connecting to the correspondence between the identification number and
your name. These data, both electronic and paper, will be stored for three years upon the
completion of the study and then destroyed.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be included that would reveal your identity. No photographs, videos, or
audio-tape recordings of you will be used in this study.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
130
You can choose to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in the study, you may
withdraw at any time without any consequences. You may also refuse to answer any
questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the study.
INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Saliha Sha, at SSha@usc.edu or Dr. Hirabayashi, Ph.D. at (213) 740-3470.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant
you may contact the IRB directly at the information provided below. If you have
questions about the research and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to
talk to someone independent of the research team, please contact the University Park IRB
(UPIRB), Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Stonier Hall, Room
224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.
SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT
I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions.
My questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this
study. I have been given a copy of this form.
Name of Participant
Signature of Participant Date
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.
131
Name of Person Obtaining Consent
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This quantitative study investigated whether and to what extent the motivational and sociocultural factors affect female Asian American high school physics students’ achievement, their intended major in college, and their planned career goals at work fields. A survey of 62 questions, extracted from subscales of AAMAS,STPQ and PSE, were conducted with 274 high school physics students in an effort to better inform current academic practitioners how to better serve this population. Correlational matrix, t-tests and chi-square tests were used for data analysis. A main effect of gender was found on expectancy-related beliefs, choice of intended college major and planned career choice. A significant effect for Asian American students of different immigration status was also found on their physics self-efficacy, acculturation and enculturation. Parental educational levels also have a main effect on Asian American physics students’ expectancy for success, acculturation and achievement. However, there was no ethnicity effect found between Asian American and non-Asian American students. It is in the hope that these findings can provide a deeper insight in understanding the motivational and sociocultural factors that affect female Asian American high schoolers in order to enhance their higher interests and participation rate in physics as well as to increase the headcount to study and work in physics and engineering fields.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Educational factors at urban public school that contribute to variation in academic achievement: comparison of high and average achieving Chinese Americans
PDF
Parental involvement and student motivation: A quantitative study of the relationship between student goal orientation and student perceptions of parental involvement among 5th grade students
PDF
Expectancy value theory and African American student motivation
PDF
Motives and methods: motivation, learning approaches, and academic achievement of students during first year transition to medical school
PDF
The relationship between student perceptions of parental expectations, utility value, aptitude and English achievement among Asian American high school students
PDF
Motivation, persistence, and achievement in East Asian languages learning: an expectancy-value theory perspective
PDF
Reading comprehension of children of Hawaiian ancestry: a study of motivational and sociocultural factors
PDF
Individual, family, and peer influences on substance use, delinquency, and problem behaviors among at-risk Asian American and Pacific Islander adolescents
PDF
The plight of African American males in urban schools: a case study
PDF
Motivational, parental, and cultural influences on achievement and persistence in basic skills mathematics at the community college
PDF
The relationship between motivational factors and engagement in an urban high school setting
PDF
The influence of parental involvement, self-efficacy, locus of control, and acculturation on academic achievement among Latino high school students
PDF
The relationship of model minority stereotype, Asian cultural values, and acculturation to goal orientation, academic self-efficacy, and academic achievement in Asian American college students
PDF
The relationship of teachers' parenting styles and Asian American students' reading motivation
PDF
Gender, parental expectations, socioeconomic status, occupation and choice and attitude toward private vs. public colleges and universities
PDF
Urban teacher persistence: self-efficacy, affect, and values
PDF
A quantitative study on southeast Asian and Latino student's perceptions of teachers' expectations and self-efficacy
PDF
Vocational education graduates: a mixed methods analysis on beliefs and influences of career choice and persistence
PDF
The relationship between parenting styles, career decision self-efficacy, and career maturity of Asian American college students
PDF
An examination of classroom social environment on motivation and engagement of college early entrant honors students
Asset Metadata
Creator
Sha, Saliha L.
(author)
Core Title
Sociocultural and motivational factors affecting Asian American females studying physics and engineering in high school
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education
Publication Date
05/02/2012
Defense Date
04/02/2012
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Asian American,gender stereotype,motivational,OAI-PMH Harvest,sociocultural,STEM
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Hirabayashi, Kimberly (
committee chair
), Hocevar, Dennis (
committee member
), Ragusa, Gisele (
committee member
)
Creator Email
salihasha@yahoo.com,ssha@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-25841
Unique identifier
UC11288906
Identifier
usctheses-c3-25841 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-ShaSalihaL-727.pdf
Dmrecord
25841
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Sha, Saliha L.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
Asian American
gender stereotype
motivational
sociocultural
STEM