International Journal of Science Education, Part B

Communication and Public Engagement

ISSN: 2154-8455 (Print) 2154-8463 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsed20

The influence of students’ participation in STEM

competitions on their interest in STEM careers

Kelly Miller, Gerhard Sonnert & Philip Sadler

To cite this article: Kelly Miller, Gerhard Sonnert & Philip Sadler (2017): The influence of students’
participation in STEM competitions on their interest in STEM careers, International Journal of
Science Education, Part B, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2017.1397298

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2017.1397298

Published online: 07 Nov 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 43

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsed20

Download by: [University of Florida] Date: 09 December 2017, At: 22:53

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2017.1397298

The influence of students’ participation in STEM competitions on

their interest in STEM careers
Kelly Millera, Gerhard Sonnertb and Philip Sadlerb
a
John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA;
b
Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Pre-college student participation in science fairs, robotics competitions, Received 6 December 2016
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

computing contests and other science, technology, engineering, and Accepted 23 October 2017
mathematics (STEM) competitions increases every year in the United
KEYWORDS
States. This is despite the fact that little is known about the relationship Science fairs; secondary/high
between STEM competition participation and career interest in STEM. school; science outreach
Through logistic regressions, this study addresses three main research
questions: Controlling for student background variables and prior STEM
career interest, does participating in a STEM competition increase the
likelihood of STEM career interest at the end of high school? Does the
field of competition (robotics, engineering, science fair, information
technology) a student participates in influence the sub-discipline of
STEM career interest? And, what is the relationship between the number
of competitions participated in and the probability of interest in a STEM
career? The study uses data from the ‘Outreach Programs and Science
Career Intentions’ survey (N = 15,847), a large-scale sample of university
students enrolled in mandatory English courses. Our data reveal three
results of interest. First, students who participate in STEM competitions
are more likely to express interest in a STEM-related career at the end of
high school than are students who do not participate, even when
students’ prior career interest in STEM is controlled for. Second, the
relationship between competition participation and interest in a STEM
career appears to be domain specific. Third, the impact of competition
participation on pursuit of a STEM career is three times stronger when
students compete in more than one competition. These findings suggest
that competitions are an effective way to foster career interest in
specific STEM careers.

Introduction
Economic projections indicate that, over the next decade, the United States will need one million
more science, technology, engineering and mathematics professionals than it can supply at the cur-
rent rate (President’s Council, 2010). The number of workers trained for careers in science, technol-
ogy, engineering and mathematics (STEM) is insufficient to meet the country’s rising need for those
who are technically trained and scientifically literate (National Research Council [NRC], 2011).
STEM refers to the academic disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
The term is frequently used in the United States in the context of increasing competitiveness in tech-
nological innovation through STEM educational policy and workforce development. Similar acro-
nyms exist in other countries to group together and describe these disciplines. In Germany, for

CONTACT Kelly Miller kmiller@seas.harvard.edu John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard
University, 9 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
 2 K. MILLER ET AL.

example, the widely used near-equivalent is MINT (Mathematik, Informatik, Naturwissenschaft und
Technik). In the French part of Canada, it is STGM (sciences, technologies, génie et mathématiques).
To make the STEM worker shortage worse, studies reveal that there has been a recent decrease in
graduation rates in STEM fields (Coble & Allen, 2005; Cullinane, 2009; Dagley, Georgiopoulos,
Reece, & Young, 2016). There is a growing concern that this shortfall of STEM trained workers
will impede the ability of the United States to compete globally in an ever more technologically
advanced and science-driven economy (Anderson & Kim, 2006; Chen & Weko, 2009; Dowd, Mal-
colm, & Bensimon, 2009).
While this study is situated in the U.S. context, similar concerns about the future STEM workforce
have also come to the foreground in other countries. For example, the Directorate-General for
Research and Innovation of the European Commission sponsors a program that, among other
initiatives, includes STEM education efforts. They describe their motivation as follows.
Europe needs a skilled population, competent in science, technology, engineering and mathematics – the so-
called STEM subjects – not only for comprising the driving force for economic prosperity, competitiveness
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

and growth, but – first and foremost – for having a science and technology literate European society. Europe
needs its best minds to meet global interconnected societal challenges. … Investing in making scientific and
research careers more attractive for young people improves their culture, prepares them to act as well-informed
citizens and equips them with the necessary knowledge and skills to match the current and future labor market
needs. (European Commission, 2015)

To meet the growing demand for STEM workers, more students need to be interested in pursuing
degrees in STEM fields. Recently, a strong focus has been placed on programs designed to boost
bachelor and graduate STEM degree attainment rates (Augustine, 2005). Many state, national and
private foundations have developed programs and strategies designed to improve the overall quality
of STEM education in order to both attract more students to STEM fields and better prepare them
for the increasing technological demands of the twenty-first century (Kuenzi, 2008; White House,
2010). To bolster interest in STEM, many schools have developed integrated activities that promote
discovery and innovation both within the school curricula (e.g. Project Lead the Way, 2011) and
through STEM-related clubs and activities via after-school programs. Many studies have shown
that increasing students’ academic interest, achievement, and positive attitudes towards STEM
will raise the number of students who choose to pursue a STEM-related career (Astin, 1993; Britner,
2008; Eccles & Barber, 1999; Hackett & Betz, 1989; Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Krapp, Hidi, & Rennin-
ger, 1992; Lavonen et al., 2008; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Porter & Umbach, 2006; Prokop, Pro-
kop, & Tunnicliffe, 2007; Tai, Liu, Maltese, & Fan, 2006).
Both improving students’ academic achievement and fostering their interest in STEM have been
shown to influence their pursuit of STEM fields in college. The strongest predictor for choosing to
pursue a STEM discipline is academic preparedness, as measured by both which science and math-
ematics courses students take and their performance in these courses (Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009;
Frehill, 1997; Levine & Wyckoff, 1991; Song & Glick, 2004). Failure in engineering education is
strongly connected to poor preparation in mathematics and science (Budny, LeBold, & Bjedov,
1998). Many studies have also shown the importance of students’ attitudes toward STEM as well
as their self-efficacy in determining their selection of a STEM-related career (Astin, 1993; Britner,
2008; Eccles, 1987; Hackett & Betz, 1989; Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2008; Porter & Umbach,
2006; Prokop et al., 2007). Developing students’ interest (and motivation) in STEM fields has also
been shown to effectively promote STEM career choice (Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Krapp et al.,
1992; Lavonen et al., 2008; Lent et al., 1994). There is a strong correlation between students’ early
interest (both inside and outside the classroom) and the career they ultimately chose (Tai et al.,
2006). Tai et al. (2006) found that career choices of eighth graders were strong predictors for
their careers at age thirty. Maines (1983) found that students who, in secondary school, indicated
a high level of interest in STEM were more likely to choose a STEM major and persist in that field.
There is an increasingly wide range of science learning experiences outside of school that have the
potential to improve science literacy and interest in STEM on a national scale (Bell, Lewenstein,
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 3

Shouse, & Feder, 2009). These experiences can be anything from science-related hobbies to after-
school programs, summer camps, or STEM related competitions. Both the Academic Competitive-
ness Council and the National Science Board consider out-of-school, ‘informal’ education an integral
part of the American education system needed to secure ‘U.S. economic competitiveness, particularly
the future ability of the nation’s education institutions to produce citizens literate in STEM concepts
and to produce future scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and technologists’ (National Research
Council, 2011, p. 5). Federal spending on out-of-school programs has increased from $40 million
in 1998 to $1 billion in 2002 (National Research Council, 2009). A range of studies show that
out-of-school STEM activities can have a positive effect on students’ knowledge, interest and atti-
tudes as well as students’ decision to pursue a STEM-related career. The focus of this study is on
STEM competitions, a particular type of out-of-school activity.

Literature review
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Out-of-school activities and academic preparedness

Numerous studies have linked out-of-school activities with increased student knowledge and aca-
demic performance in STEM subjects (Bell et al., 2009; Bybee, 2001; Eccles & Barber, 1999; Posner
& Vandell, 1999). After-school programs are shown to help students develop a better understanding
of scientific concepts, processes and procedures (McGee-Brown, Martin, Monsaas, & Stombler,
2003), acquire scientific inquiry and reasoning skills (Abernathy & Vineyard, 2001; Bernard,
2005; Fisanck, 2010), as well as develop their communication skills (Czerniak & Lumpe, 1996;
Grote, 1995). For example, one study examined the impact of participating in Gateway, an out-
of-school mathematics and science program for underrepresented high school students. The study
entailed a matched comparison group of students not involved in Gateway and showed that Gateway
program participants were more likely than students in the comparison group to complete high
school mathematics and science classes (Campbell et al., 1998). In another example, the Mathemat-
ics, Engineering, Science Achievement (MESA) After School Program is designed to help underre-
presented middle and high school students in mathematics and science and increase the number of
those students who chose to pursue a career in a STEM-related field. Results from a study on this
program showed that MESA participants had higher grade point averages than non-MESA students,
and that MESA participants had taken more mathematics and science classes by their senior year
than non-MESA students (Bell et al., 2009).

Out-of-school activities and interest in STEM

Studies have found that out-of-school activities are also effective in increasing interest and motiv-
ation in STEM (Bell et al., 2009; Hayden, Ouyang, Scinski, Olszewski, & Bielefeldt, 2011; Zaff &
Redd, 2001). Eccles and Barber (1999) showed that students who participate in school-related
clubs tend to report liking school more, have higher GPAs, and are more likely to attend college
than students who do not participate in clubs. A longitudinal study conducted by Gibson and
Chase (2002) in which three groups of middle school students were compared; those who had par-
ticipated in a summer science program, those who had applied but not been accepted, and those who
had not applied. The three groups were followed over a 5-year period. Interest in science decreased in
all three groups, but students who participated in the 2-week science program had a more positive
attitude toward science and higher interest in science careers than did the other two groups.

Out-of-school activities and STEM career choice

Several studies on specific STEM out-of-school programs and activities have found connections
between program participation and increased likelihood of pursuing a career in a STEM related
 4 K. MILLER ET AL.

field (Dabney et al., 2012; Naizer, 1993; Olson, 1985). Informal out-of-school activities such as play-
ing with chemistry sets or making and fixing things have been shown to have influence on students’
pursuit of STEM careers (Naizer, 1993). Raising Interest in Science and Engineering is a program
designed to increase middle school girls’ confidence and persistence in mathematics and science.
Participants of this program have been shown to pursue careers in mathematics and science at an
above average rate; 86% of participants go on to pursue careers in mathematics and science and
slightly more than half of participants changed their career plans after participating in the program
(Bell et al., 2009). Another study found that adults working in the sciences reported that their science
fair experiences had influenced their career choice (Olson, 1985). Finally, Dabney et al. (2012) found
that students who participated in science clubs or competitions at least a few times a year were 1.5
times more likely to report a STEM related career interest in university than students who did not
participate.
Many studies have shown that out-of-school STEM activities have the ability to impact career
choice. However, the vast majority of these studies do not take into account students’ interest in
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

STEM before participating in the activity. This makes it impossible to determine whether the stu-
dents who get involved in these activities were already interested in a STEM career, or if that interest
grew out of the experience of participating in the activity. In addition to this methodological weak-
ness in the literature there are also very few studies that look at the impact of specific out-of-school
activities, such as STEM competitions.

STEM competitions
STEM competitions have become an increasingly popular out-of-school activity over the past cen-
tury. The first science fair was in 1928 when the American Institute of the City of New York spon-
sored a fair of displayed student experiments. This event gave rise to more than eight hundred high
school science clubs and by the mid-1950s, school science fairs had expanded across most of the Uni-
ted States. Today, thousands of students around the country participate in science fairs and Science
Olympiads (Abernathy & Vineyard, 2001). In some districts around the United States, teachers man-
date student participation in school science fairs (Carlisle & Deeter, 1989). Students can advance
through the hierarchy of science fair competitions from their local school fair to compete in increas-
ingly competitive fairs at the regional, state, national and international levels.
As part of the ‘Educate to Innovate’ initiative, a program designed to inspire more students to
pursue a degree in STEM, dozens of students who have won science fair competitions in their high
schools are hosted at the White House Science Fair every year (Freking & Hennessey, 2016).
Although they have not been around for as long as science fair competitions, engineering and
robotics competitions have also gained popularity over the past twenty years. There is now an almost
countless number of robotics and engineering competitions designed for middle school and high
school students. Many of these competitions offer wining teams large cash prizes and college scholar-
ships to prestigious technical universities. The Team America Rocketry Challenge (TARC) is a
national model rocket competition for middle school and high school students hosted by the Aero-
space Industries Association in partnership with the National Association of Rocketry, NASA, and
the Department of Defense. TARC’s mission statement is ‘to build a stronger U.S. workforce in
science, technology, engineering and mathematics.’1 Approximately five thousand students from
across the United States compete in TARC each year. A grand prize pool of over $60,000 is shared
by winning teams. The For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) program
is a national nonprofit organization that runs after-school robotics competitions for young people
aged 6–18 both in the U.S. and internationally. The FIRST program claims to ‘motivate young people
to pursue education and career opportunities in science, technology, engineering and math while
building self-confidence, knowledge, and life skills.’2 Since its inception in 1992, over three hundred
thousand students have participated in FIRST competitions.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 5

Even more recently, information technology (IT) and computing competitions have gained popu-
larity with the rise of computers, information and communication technology in society and edu-
cation specifically. The International Olympian in Informatics (IOI) is one of the oldest and most
prestigious international computing competitions at the high school level. It was started in 1989
by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and its primary
goal is to stimulate interest in information technology. Each participating country sends four stu-
dents who compete in algorithmic tasks. Winners of the IOI are said to ‘belong to the best young
computer scientists of the world.’.3
STEM competitions are also popular in countries outside the United States. The Intel Inter-
national Science and Engineering Fair (ISEF), for example, is the largest pre-college scientific
research event in the world. Each year, almost two thousand students from all over the world com-
pete for cash prizes and scholarships. Successful participation in ISEF during high school is thought
to increase the likelihood that a student will be accepted to a competitive college STEM program. The
European Union Contest for Young Scientists (EUCYS) is an annual contest designed to allow young
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

scientists from countries in the European Union to showcase research and innovation in the areas of
science, engineering and technology. One of the primary objectives of the EUCYS is to attract stu-
dents to careers in science and technology.4 The Stockholm International Junior Water Prize5 is a
competition centered around innovation in water and sustainability issues. Every year, this compe-
tition attracts thousands of students from 30 different countries around the world. Jugend forscht6 is
a STEM competition in Germany whose mission is to train and support students in the pursuit of
mathematics, computer science, natural sciences and technology (MINT).
Despite their prevalence and popularity internationally, scant research has been conducted on the
impact of these kinds of STEM competitions. One study did look at the effect of participation in
FIRST robotics competitions on students’ attitudes towards STEM. FIRST participants were found
to score statistically higher on all measures of STEM-related interests and attitudes than a compari-
son group of students who did not participate in FIRST (Melchior, Burack, Gutbezahl, Hoover, &
Marcus, 2015). Another study on FIRST found that its participants were seven times more likely
to become an engineering major than the average college student (Melchior et al., 2015). Both
studies, however, had a problem with potential selection bias because, similar to most other studies
in this field, they did not account for the FIRST participants’ prior interest in STEM. Another study
found an interesting dosage effect, i.e. a relationship between the number of STEM clubs/compe-
titions students participated in and their career choice. Sahin (2013) found that, as students’ numbers
of STEM clubs/competitions increased, so too did the likelihood that they would pursue a STEM
major in college. This study was limited to a specific multi-charter school system, which encouraged
its students to participate in STEM clubs/competitions and did not control for the effect of prior
interest. Despite the vast number of students involved in STEM competitions and the perception
amongst both policy makers and educators that they are beneficial to students of all ages, there is
a dearth of research on STEM competitions, their benefit to students, and their effect on career
choice.

STEM competitions and gender

Given the underrepresentation of women in American science over the past several decades and the
potential role of STEM competitions in attracting students to STEM careers, the gender aspects of
participation in STEM competitions are important to consider. Sonnert, Sadler, and Michaels
(2013) found that girls were just as well represented as boys in a science fair competition (in fact,
they represented a slight majority) and that girls were just as likely as boys to win a prize. Dabney
et al. (2012) found no significant interaction between STEM competition participation and gender,
concluding that males and females experience similar boosts to STEM career interest from STEM
competition participation. However, an evaluation of one international robotics competition for
middle and high school students found that male participants outnumbered female participants
 6 K. MILLER ET AL.

almost 3:1 (Hendricks, Alemdar, & Ogletree, 2012). This report also found that a higher percentage
of males than females agreed that participation in the competition had made them more interested in
pursuing a career in a STEM field. This suggests that participation in robotics competitions benefits
males more than females in terms of promoting interest in a STEM career.

Research questions
The purpose of this study is to explore the connection between participation in STEM competitions
and STEM career interest. It addresses the following three research questions:
First, controlling for student background variables and prior career interest, does participating in
a STEM competition increase the likelihood of being interested in pursuing a STEM career at the end
of high school? Second, does the field of competition (robotics, engineering, science fair, IT) a stu-
dent participates in influence the sub-discipline of STEM career interest? And lastly, what is the
relationship between the number of competitions participated in and the probability of interest in
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

a STEM career?

Methods
Survey and sample
The population for this study is freshman students at American institutions of higher learning (both
four-year and two-year institutions) who, in the fall semester for 2013, participated in the Outreach
Programs and Science Career Intentions (OPSCI) survey of students in introductory college classes,
funded by the National Science Foundation. The survey was administered mostly to freshman Eng-
lish classes that were required by the institution. This way, we were able to target a student popu-
lation with a wide range of career interests (both in and outside of STEM). To solicit involvement
in the study, recruitment emails were sent to English Department Chairs at 150 institutions across
the United States. 104 of the 150 institutions did not respond. Out of the 46 institutions that did
respond, 27 (59%) participated with at least one instructor. 414 of the 535 instructors who initially
agreed to participate in the study, followed through and returned 15,847 completed student surveys.
The students completed the surveys in class, on paper, and therefore there was 100% student
participation.
67 students at a single university were used to pilot test the OPSCI survey. To determine the test-
retest reliability, a subset (N = 57) of these students completed the survey twice, two weeks apart. The
Pearson correlation coefficient between the test and retest responses was measured to determine the
reliability for the questions with responses on a continuous scale. For questions with categorical
responses, Cohen’s kappa was calculated as a measure of reliability. The mean of the correlation coef-
ficients was 0.73 and the mean of the Cohen’s kappas was 0.59.

Dependent variable: career interest at the end of high school

The question from the survey that is central for this analysis asks about students’ career intentions at
various stages in their education up to that point (see Figure 1). Specifically, question 1 on the survey
asks ‘which of the following describes what you want(ed) to be in middle school, high school (beginning
and end), and in college?’
Previous research has shown that self-reported survey responses involving accurate recall of per-
ceptions are reasonably reliable. Accurate recall by subjects is essential and possible, even though
those unfamiliar with the research literature often view self-report as inherently unreliable. Self-
report surveys (even concerning such touchy subjects as drug usage) can be reasonably reliable (Oet-
ting & Beauvais, 1990). The shape of the ‘forgetting curve’ for such data is very nearly linear for recall
of information similar to that which we will collect and is remarkably low, decreasing at a rate of only
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 7
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Figure 1. Question #1 on career interest from the OPSCI survey.

3% each year in a study lasting twelve years. Bradburn (2000) explains that recall of this information
encoded in an organized fashion can be quite reliable, especially if contextual cues are included in the
survey instrument. The accuracy and reliability of self-report depends primarily on context, rel-
evance, and survey clarity (Bradburn, 2000; Niemi & Smith, 2003; Pace, Barahona, & Kaplan,
1985). In a review of existing research on self-report, Kuncel, Credé, and Thomas (2005) conclude
that self-report may be characterized as particularly accurate in samples where the surveys address
issues relevant to the respondents. As such, our surveys are conducted in fall semester college classes
where the newly arrived college students’ reflection on their prior experience is commonplace. In
 8 K. MILLER ET AL.

addition, the students’ own instructors administer the surveys. We have generally conducted
reliability studies of students taking our surveys twice, two weeks apart. Comparisons of their
responses found them to be highly reproducible (Tai, Sadler, & Loehr, 2005).
The question is followed by a list of twenty-nine different professions. Students were told to mark
all that applied and to leave blank those that did not apply. For the purpose of our analysis, we group
the twenty-nine professions into one of four categories: Non-STEM careers (choices v-cc on Figure
1), a career in computer science (choice q), engineering careers (choices h – p) and science and math-
ematics careers (choices a – g and r – u).
Because there is a strong correlation between students’ early interest (both inside and outside the
classroom) and the career they ultimately choose (Tai et al., 2006), we expect student interest in a
STEM career at the end of high school to be highly predictive of pursuing a career in STEM. Con-
sequently, we use career interest at the end of high school as our dependent variable. At the end of
high school, 51% of the respondents expressed interest in a non-STEM career, 34% expressed interest
in a career in science or math, 12% expressed interest in an engineering career and 4% expressed
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

interest in pursuing a career in computer science.

Independent variable: STEM competition

Question 19 from the survey asks students if they participated in a STEM competition run by a col-
lege/university and to indicate the type. The choices are science fair, robotics competition, comput-
ing/IT competition, engineering competition and other. 11% of the respondents indicated that they
had participated in at least one type of STEM competition. Of this 11%, 42% participated in science
fair, 14% in robotics competitions, 5% in computing/IT competitions, 8% in engineering compe-
titions and 32% in STEM competitions classified as ‘other’. We assume that this ‘other’ category
includes competitions such as Science Olympiad, Science Bowl and the International Mathematical
Olympiad.

Control variable: prior interest in STEM

As we are interested in the influence of participation in a STEM competition on interest in a STEM
career at the end of high school, it is important that we control for student interest at the beginning of
high school. Since it is most likely that students participate in STEM competitions run by a college/
university during the high school years, we used interest in STEM at the beginning of high school as a
control variable. Although student interest in STEM-careers remains relatively stable during high
school, there are a significant number of students who switch from being interested in STEM to dis-
interested (and vice-versa) over the high school years. Figure 2 shows that of the 7964 respondents
who indicated at the beginning of high school that they were interested in a STEM career, 5796 (73%)
remained interested at the end of high school. Of the 7883 respondents who indicated, at the begin-
ning of high school that they were not interested in a STEM career, 5874 (75%) remained uninter-
ested at the end of high school. Figure 2 also shows that there is a slight net loss (160 students) of
students interested in STEM over the high school years. Slightly more students switch from being
interested in STEM to uninterested (2168) than those who switch from being uninterested to inter-
ested (2009).

Control variables: demographic and background factors

Interest in a STEM career depends on many factors, in addition to interest in STEM at the beginning
of high school and the potential influence of participation in a STEM competition during high
school. Consequently, we control for a number of demographic and background factors in our stat-
istical models.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 9
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Figure 2. Sankey diagram comparing the number of students interested in a STEM-related career at the beginning of high school
with that number at the end of high school.

Because the strongest predictor for pursuit of a STEM career is academic preparedness, as
measured by both which science and mathematics courses students take and their performance in
these courses (Crisp et al., 2009; Frehill, 1997; Levine & Wyckoff, 1991; Song & Glick, 2004), we con-
trol for a number of academic preparedness variables. These control variables include whether the
student took high school calculus or not, grade in the highest mathematics class the student took,
and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) mathematics score. If students took the American College Test-
ing (ACT)7 mathematics instead, that score was mapped onto the SAT scale, using a concordance
published by the College Board. Given that another strong predictor for the pursuit of a STEM career
is the career of the students’ parents and the level of encouragement and support for science that
students receive at home, we also control for students’ backgrounds related to their families.
These background variables include the mother’s level of education, whether science was involved
in the father’s career, whether science was involved in the mother’s career, whether the mother
was encouraging of a STEM career, whether the father was encouraging of a STEM career, and
the general level of home support for science. We did initially control for father’s level of education
(in addition to mother’s level). We found, however, that this was not a significant predictor of inter-
est in a career in STEM and, consequently removed it from the model.

Results
STEM interest at the beginning of high school compared to the end of high school
Figure 2 compares the number of students interested in a STEM-related career at the beginning of
high school with that at the end of high school. From this diagram, we can see that most of the stu-
dents who are interested in STEM at the end of high school were also interested in STEM at the
beginning of high school. The same can be said about students who are not interested in STEM
at the beginning of high school; most of them are also not interested at the end of high school.
Approximately 25% of interested students (2168 out of the 7964 students interested at the beginning
 10 K. MILLER ET AL.

of high school) switch to being disinterested at the end of high school. The proportion of students
who switch from being not interested in STEM at the beginning of high school to interested by the
end of high school is also around 25% (2009 out of the 7883 students not interested at the beginning
of high school. In the subsequent sections, we examine the relationship between student interest in
STEM at the end of high school, and participation in a STEM competition, controlling for student
interest in STEM at the beginning of high school.

STEM competition participation and STEM career interest

To determine the relationship between participation in any STEM competition and interest in pur-
suing a career in a STEM career in university, we construct a logistic regression model using career
interest at the end of high school (STEM versus non-STEM) as the dependent variable and partici-
pation in any STEM competition as the independent variable. We control for the preparedness vari-
ables (mathematics background and mathematics performance) and background variables (parents’
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

careers and levels of education and general level of home support for science) described earlier. This
logistic regression model is summarized as model 1 in Table 1. As indicated by the odds ratio of
model 1, students who participate in any STEM competition are 1.21 times (p < 0.001) more likely
to be interested in a career in STEM than are students who did not participate in any STEM com-
petition, after controlling for the other predictors present in the model.

Specificity of STEM career interest and STEM competition participation

To determine the relationship between specific fields of competitions and interest in sub-disciplines
of STEM careers, we construct a multinomial logistic regression model, using end of high school
career interest in three specific STEM fields (computer science, engineering, [other] science and
mathematics) as the levels of the dependent variable, against the baseline of no STEM career interest,
and participation in a specific type of STEM competition (robotics, science fair, engineering IT/ com-
puting, or other) as the independent variable. This multinomial regression model is summarized in
models 2A-C in Table 1. The results of model 2 indicate that, controlling for interest at the beginning
of high school as well as background and preparedness variables, students are more likely to be inter-
ested in pursuing careers in the same sub-disciplines in which they participated in competitions. As
indicated by the odds ratio of model 2A, students who participate in a computing/IT competition are
3.72 times more likely to be interested in pursuing a career in computer science at the end of high
school than students who did not compete in any competition (p < 0.001). The lack of statistical sig-
nificance for the odds ratios for the other types of competitions (robotics, engineering, science fair)
indicates that participation in any other type of competition is not a significant predictor for career
interest in computer science. Figure 3 plots the results from model 2A to show the difference in the
probability of interest in a career in computer science at the end of high school for prototypical (aver-
age) students who compete in each of the four different types of STEM competitions. We form stu-
dent prototypes by weighting the relevant coefficients (for student prior interest, preparedness,
background and demographic) by the mean or proportion of the respective variables in the sample.
Figure 3 shows that an average student who has competed in an IT/computing competition is 40%
more likely to be interested in a career in computer science than an average student who did not
compete in any STEM competition. An average student who has competed in engineering, robotics,
science fair or other types of STEM competitions is no more likely to be interested in a career in
computer science than an average student who did not compete in any STEM competitions.
Model 2B shows that students who compete in an engineering competition and students who
compete in a robotics competition are 2.16 times and 2.07 times respectively more likely to be inter-
ested in pursing a career in engineering at the end of high school (p < 0.001). It is worth noting that
participation in computing/IT competitions or science fair competitions are not significant predic-
tors for interest in a career in engineering. Figure 4 plots the results from model 2B to show the
 Table 1. Summary of logistic and multinomial regression models.
Model 1 Model 2A Model 2B Model 2C Model 3 Model 4
Interest in STEM Interest in CS Interest in Eng at Interest in Science Interest in Eng at Interest in STEM
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

at End of HS at End of HS End of HS at End of HS End of HS at End of HS

N 15, 847 15, 847 15, 847 15, 847 15, 847 15, 847
Pseudo R 2 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.25
Odds Ratios
Constant 0.31*** 3.72*** 0.04*** 0.25*** 0.04*** 0.31***
Participation in any competition 1.21***
Participation in science fair 1.04 0.98 1.37*** 0.97 1.24*
Participation in IT Competition 6.08*** 1.39 0.48* 1.39 1.05
Participation in Engineering Competition 0.94 2.16*** 1.45 2.18*** 1.66***
Participation in Other Competition 0.58 0.96 1.03 0.96 0.97
Participation in Robotics Competition 1.28 2.07*** 1.07 3.53*** 2.04***
Robotics, gender interaction 0.49*

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B

Robotics, black interaction 0.31*
Interest in STEM at beginning of HS 7.27*** 7.25***
Interest in CS at beginning of HS 34.07*** 2.57*** 1.19 2.59***
Interest in Eng at beginning of HS 4.60*** 15.54*** 2.29*** 15.49***
Interest in Science at beginning of HS 2.28*** 3.11*** 9.61*** 3.10***
Took Calculus 1.00 0.96 1.08** 0.96 1.08** 1.00
Grade in highest mathematics taken 1.11*** 1.08 1.18*** 1.09*** 1.19*** 1.11***
ACT/SAT mathematics score 1.16*** 1.06 1.44*** 1.10*** 1.45*** 1.16***
Level of home support 1.11*** 1.02 1.05 1.14*** 1.05 1.11***
Mother’s education 0.96* 1.00 0.99 0.94** 0.99 0.96*
Mother encouraged STEM 1.13*** 1.04 1.02 1.17*** 1.02 1.13***
Father encourage STEM 1.16*** 1.20* 1.36*** 1.09** 1.36*** 1.16***
Science involved in Father’s Career 0.99 1.04 1.02 0.98 1.02 0.99
Science involved in Mother’s Career 1.01 0.96 1.01 1.02 1.01 1.01
Gender 1.19*** 0.01*** 2.89*** 0.83*** 2.97*** 1.18***
Black 1.12 1.13 1.12 1.08 1.23 1.14*
Asian 1.02 1.41* 1.02 1.00 0.98 1.05
Hispanic 1.15** 0.73 1.57 1.06 1.55*** 1.15*
Other 0.95 1.00 1.04*** 0.94 1.03 0.96
***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.

11
 12 K. MILLER ET AL.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Figure 3. Differences in the probability of interest in a career in computer science at the end of high school for students who
competed in different types of STEM competitions, compared with those who participated in none.

Figure 4. Differences in the probability of interest in a career in engineering at the end of high school for students who competed
in different types of STEM competitions, compared with those who participated in none.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 13

difference in the probability of interest in an engineering career at the end of high school for proto-
typical (average) students who compete in each of the four different types of STEM competitions.
Figure 4 shows that an average student who has competed in an engineering competition is 6%
more likely to be interested in an engineering field, and that an average student who has competed
in a robotics competition is 5% more likely to be interested in an engineering field than is an aver-
age student who did not compete in any STEM competition. An average student who has competed
in IT/computing, science fair or other types of STEM competitions is no more likely to be interested
in a career in engineering than an average student who did not compete in any STEM competitions.
Model 2C shows that students who compete in a science fair competition are 1.37 times more
likely to be interested in pursuing a career in science and mathematics (a STEM field outside engin-
eering and computer science) than students who did not compete in any competition (p < 0.001).
Figure 5 plots the results from model 2C to show the difference in the probability of interest in a
career in science/mathematics at the end of high school for prototypical (average) students who com-
pete in each of the four different types of STEM competitions. Figure 4 shows that an average student
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

who has competed in a science fair is 7% more likely to be interested in a career in science/math-
ematics than an average student who did not compete in any STEM competition. An average student
who has competed in engineering, robotics, or other types of STEM competitions is no more (or less)
likely to be interested in a career in computer science than an average student who did not compete
in any STEM competitions. Overall, models 1 and 2 indicate that students who compete in a STEM
competition during high school are more likely to be interested in a career in STEM and that the type
of competition participated in predicts the specific sub-disciplines of STEM careers that students are
interested in pursuing.

Figure 5. Differences in the probability of interest in a career in science at the end of high school for students who competed in
different types of STEM competitions, compared with those who participated in none.
 14 K. MILLER ET AL.

Gender and race and robotics competition participation

Models 3 and 4 (Table 1) summarize the results of two interaction models we find to be statistically
significant. Interactions are modeled by crossing individual predictors (gender, race, academic pre-
paredness) with competition participation variables. These interaction variables are incorporated
into the logistic and multinomial models discussed. Two significant interactions are found. The
first is between gender and participation in a robotics competition on interest in a career in engin-
eering. This model is summarized in Table 1 (model 3). Figure 6 plots the results from model 3 to
show the difference in the probability of interest in a career in engineering for prototypical male and
female students who compete in a robotics competition, compared with male and female students
who do not compete in a robotics competition. Female students who participate in robotics compe-
titions are 10% more likely to be interested in a career in engineering than female students who do
not participate in robotics competitions (p < 0.05). By contrast, there is no significant difference in
engineering career interest between males who compete in robotics competitions and males who do
not participate in robotics competitions.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

The other significant interaction is between being black and participation in a robotics compe-
tition on interest in a STEM career. We summarize this model in Table 1 (model 4). Figure 7
plots the results from model 4 to show the difference in the probability of interest in a career in
engineering for prototypical black and non-black students who compete in a robotics competition,
compared with black and non-black students who do not compete in a robotics competition. Non-
black students who participate in robotics competitions are 20% more likely to be interested in a
STEM career than non-black students who do not participate in robotics competitions (p <
0.001). This is not the case among the black students where there is no significant difference in
STEM career interest between those who compete in robotics competitions and those who do not.

Number of years of competition participation

Figure 8 shows the probability of interest in STEM at the end of high school as a function of the
number of years of competitions competed in relative to students who did not compete in any com-
petitions during high school. Students who competed in a STEM competition (of any kind) for a year

Figure 6. Interaction between gender and competing in a robotics competition in predicting an engineering career interest.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 15
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Figure 7. Interaction between being black and competing in a robotics competition in predicting a STEM career interest.

only are 4% more likely to be interested in a STEM career at the end of high school than students who
did not compete in any STEM competition. Students who competed in more than one year of com-
petitions are 12% more likely to be interested in a STEM career at the end of high school than stu-
dents who did not compete in any STEM competition and are 8% more likely to have a STEM career
interest than are students who competed for only one year.

Figure 8. Probability of interest in STEM at the end of high school as a function of the number of years of competitions (of any kind)
competed in, relative to no competition participation.
 16 K. MILLER ET AL.

Conclusions and implications

The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of students’ STEM competition participation
on STEM career interest. Three results of the multinomial and logistic regression models shed light
on how participation in STEM competitions influences STEM career interest.
First, students’ participation in a (any) STEM competition is connected with a 5% greater likeli-
hood of STEM career interest at the end of high school. Sankey diagrams seem to indicate that the
effect of participation in STEM competitions is to retain students who were already interested in
STEM rather than attract students who were previously disinterested. This finding dovetails with
that made by Dabney et al. (2012) who found that students who participated in science clubs or com-
petitions at least a few times a year were 1.5 times more likely to report a STEM related career interest
at the end of high school than students who did not participate. As this study controls for prior
STEM interest, we can better measure the specific effect of participating in a STEM competition
on STEM career interest.
Second, we find that the relationship between STEM competition participation and STEM career
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

interest becomes stronger when we consider both the field of competition and the sub-discipline of
the student’s subsequent career interest in STEM. Participation in an IT/computing competition pre-
dicts interest in computer science specifically. Participation in a robotics or engineering competition
predicts interest in a career in engineering, and not in any other sub-discipline within STEM. Par-
ticipation in science fair is predictive of interest in a career in science/mathematics, but not in engin-
eering or computer science. Third, we find interesting interactions between participation in robotics
competitions and both gender and race. Dabney et al. (2012) found no significant interaction
between STEM competition participation and gender, concluding that males and females experience
similar boosts to STEM career interest from STEM competition participation. Hendricks, Alemdar,
& Ogletree (2012) found that a higher percentage of males than females agreed that participation in a
STEM competition had made them more interested in pursuing a STEM field career. We find that, in
contrast with these studies, participation in a robotics competition is particularly impactful for girls’
career interest in engineering. Lastly, we find that the relationship between STEM competition par-
ticipation and STEM career is much stronger when students compete in more than one competition.
It is possible that participating in a STEM competition has a positive effect on students’ self-efficacy
in STEM or, in the specific STEM sub-discipline of the competition (engineering, IT, robotics,
science) and that participating in several competitions, improves self-efficacy even more. Self-effi-
cacy has been shown to predict both academic and career-related choices (Lent et al., 1994) and
therefore improving self-efficacy within a specific content domain may increase the likelihood of
someone choosing a career associated with that domain.
We acknowledge that this study has some limitations. It is a correlational study and therefore,
causation is not clearly proven. Although we have controlled for many relevant predictors of interest
in a STEM career, we cannot say that participation in STEM competitions directly causes students to
be interested in a STEM career. We also do not know what motivates students to participate in STEM
competitions. We have found that, controlling for prior interest in STEM, participation in a STEM
competition during high school is predictive of being interested in STEM at the end of high school.
We know nothing about the factors that influence a student’s decision to participate in the first place.
Further research on student motivation would add insight to this. Lastly a surprisingly large pro-
portion of students who participate in STEM competitions (32%) chose the category ‘other’ when
prompted to categorize the competition that they were involved in. While we assume that this
‘other’ category includes competitions such as science and/or math olympics, it would be useful
to have more information on this category of competition since such a high proportion of partici-
pants competed in competitions classified in this way.
In conclusion, this study suggests that competitions are an effective way to foster career interest in
specific domains within STEM, especially when students compete in competitions over several years
of their high school careers. The specificity of the relationship between STEM competition
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 17

participation and interest should be of particular interest to the policy makers and school adminis-
trators who promote student STEM competition participation with hopes of attracting more stu-
dents’ to pursue careers in STEM. Encouraging students to participate in a science fair, for
example, will do nothing to influence student career interest in engineering or computer science,
just as participation in an IT/ computing competition will not inspire students to pursue engineering
or science/ mathematics as a career. The implications of this relationship are particularly interesting
when it comes to the participation of female students in robotics competitions. Our findings suggest
that one way to attract more women in particular to a career in engineering may be to encourage
them to participate in robotics competitions while in high school. Overall, organizers and promoters
of STEM competitions can be assured that their efforts are having a positive impact on students’
career choices when it comes to STEM and that the shortage of trained workers in specific STEM
sub-fields could be mitigated by encouraging more high school students to participate in specific
types of STEM competitions.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Notes
1. http://rocketcontest.org/
2. http://www.firstinspires.org/about/vision-and-mission
3. http://ioinformatics.org/history.shtml
4. http://ec.europa.eu/research/eucys/index_en.cfm?pg=objectives
5. http://www.siwi.org/prizes/stockholmjuniorwaterprize/
6. https://www.jugend-forscht.de/
7. Both ACT and SAT scores are standardized tests used for college admissions and merit-based scholarships in
the United States. Colleges allow students to take either for admissions. Both tests generally cover the same con-
tent. The biggest difference between them is that the SAT has one mathematics section for which students are
not allowed to use calculators.

Acknowledgments
Several people contributed to the work described in this paper. P.S. & G.S. conceived of the basic idea for this work. P.S.
& G.S. designed and carried out the survey, and K.M. analyzed the results. G.S. & P.S. supervised the research and the
development of the manuscript. K.M. wrote the first draft of the manuscript; all authors subsequently took part in the
revision process and approved the final copy of the manuscript.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation [grant number 1161052]. Any opinions, findings, and
conclusions in this article are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Without the excellent contributions of many people, the OPSCI project would not have been possible. We thank the
members of the OPSCI team: Wendy Berland, Zahra Hazari, Tyler Scott, and Annette Trenga. We would also like to
thank several STEM educators and researchers who provided advice or counsel on this project: Rocco Cieri, Katherine
Dabney, Connie Della-Piana, Robert Andrew Kolvoord, Chandra Muller, Matthew Ohland, Harriet Page, Barbara
J. Speziale, and Christos Zahopoulos. Last but not least, we are grateful to the many college English professors and
their students who gave up a portion of a class to provide data.

References
Abernathy, T. V., & Vineyard, R. N. (2001). Academic competitions in science: What are the rewards for students? The
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 74(5), 269–276.
Anderson, E., & Kim, D. (2006). Increasing the success of minority students in science and technology. Washington, DC:
American Council on Education.
 18 K. MILLER ET AL.

Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited (Vol. 1). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Augustine, N. R. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic
future. Retrieved from mdworkforce.com
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places,
and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Bernard, W. (2005). Authentic research projects: Students’ perspectives on the process, ownership, and the benefits of
doing research (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgia State University, Georgia.
Bradburn, N. (2000). “Temporal representation and event dating.” In The science of self-report, edited by A. A. Stone, J.
S. Turkan, C. A. Bachrach, J. B. Jobe, H. S. Kurtzman, and V. S. Cain, 49–61. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Britner, S. L. (2008). Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical,
and earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 955–970.
Budny, D., LeBold, W., & Bjedov, G. (1998). Assessment of the impact of the freshman engineering courses. Journal of
Engineering Education, 87, 405–411. doi:10.1109/FIE.1997.636047
Bybee, R. W. (2001). Achieving scientific literacy: Strategies for insuring that free-choice science education comp-
lements national formal science education efforts. In Free-choice science education: How we learn science outside
of school (pp. 44–63). New York: Teachers College Press.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

Campbell, P. B., Wahl, E., Slater, M., Iler, E., Moeller, B., Ba, H., & Light, D. (1998). Paths to success: An evaluation of
the gateway to higher education program. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4(2-3),
297–308.
Carlisle, R. W., & Deeter, B. C. (1989). A research study of science fairs. Science and Children, 26(4), 24–26.
Chen, X., & Weko, T. (2009). Students who study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in post-
secondary education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, NCES, 2009–161. Retrieved from http://
nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009161.pdf
Coble, C. R., & Allen, M. (2005). Keeping America competitive: Five strategies to improve mathematics and science edu-
cation. Denver: Education Commission of the States.
Crisp, G., Nora, A., & Taggart, A. (2009). Student characteristics, pre-college, college, and environmental factors as
predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: An analysis of students attending a Hispanic serving insti-
tution. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 924–942.
Cullinane, J. (2009). Diversifying the STEM pipeline: The model replication institutions program. Institute for Higher
Education Policy.
Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Predictors of science fair participation using the theory of planned behavior.
School Science & Mathematics, 97(7), 335–362.
Dabney, K. P., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., Miller-Friedmann, J. L., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Hazari, Z. (2012). Out-
of-school time science activities and their association with career interest in STEM. International Journal of Science
Education, Particle B, 2(1), 63–79.
Dagley, M., Georgiopoulos, M., Reece, A., & Young, C. (2016). Increasing retention and graduation rates
through a STEM learning community. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 18(2),
167–182.
Dowd, A. C., Malcolm, L. E., & Bensimon, E. M. (2009). Benchmarking the success of Latina and Latino students in
STEM to achieve national graduation goals. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California. Retrieved from
http://cue.usc.edu/news/NSF-Report.pdf
Eccles, J. S. (1987). Gender roles and women’s achievement-related decisions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 2, 62–
72.
Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band what kind of extra-
curricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14(1), 10–43.
European Commission, Research & Innovation. (2015). Science with and for society. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.
eu/research/swafs/index.cfm?pg=policy&lib=education
Fisanck, L. M. (2010). A descriptive study of the middle school science teacher behavior for required student participation
in science fair competitions (Published Doctoral Dissertation). Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania.
Frehill, L. M. (1997). Education and occupational sex segregation: The decision to major in engineering. The
Sociological Quarterly, 38(2), 225–249.
Freking, K., & Hennessey, K. (2016, April 16). President Obama touts robots, US ingenuity at White House Science
Fair. US News. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-04-13/obama-plans-to-
attend-his-final-white-house-science-fair
Gibson, H., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’
attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86(5), 693–705.
Grote, M. (1995). Science teacher educator’s opinions about science projects and science fairs. Journal of Science
Teacher Education, 6(1), 48–52.
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy/mathematics performance corre-
spondence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 261–273.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B 19

Hayden, K., Ouyang, Y., Scinski, L., Olszewski, B., & Bielefeldt, T. (2011). In- creasing student interest and attitudes in
STEM: Professional development and activities to engage and inspire learners. Contemporary Issues in Technology
and Teacher Education, 11(1), 47–69.
Hendricks, C. C., Alemdar, M., & Ogletree, T. (2012). The impact of participation in VEX robotics competition on
middle and high school students’ interest in pursuing STEM studies and STEM-related careers. In American society
for engineering education. American Society for Engineering Education.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2),
111–127.
House, W. (2010). President Obama to announce major expansion of “educate to innovate” campaign to improve
science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education. The White House, 9, 16. Retrieved from http://
www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office
Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (1992). Interest, learning, and development. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A.
Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3–25). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Kuenzi, J. J. (2008). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: Background, federal policy,
and legislative action.
Kuncel, N., Credé, M., & Thomas, L. (2005). The validity of self-reported grade point averages, class ranks, and test
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017

scores: A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 63–82.
Lavonen, J., Gedrovics, J., Byman, R., Meisalo, V., Juuti, K., & Uitto, A. (2008). Students’ motivational orientations and
career choice in science and technology: A comparative investigation in Finland and Latvia. Journal of Baltic Science
Education, 7(2), 86–102.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic
interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122.
Lent, R. W., Sheu, H., Singley, D., Schmidt, J. A., Schmidt, L. C., & Gloster, C. S. (2008). Longitudinal relations of self-
efficacy to outcome expectations, interests, and major choice goals in engineering students. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 73, 328–335.
Levine, J., & Wyckoff, J. (1991). Predicting persistence and success in baccalaureate engineering. Education, 111, 461–
468.
Maines, D. R. (1983). Attrition processes out of mathematics for undergraduate students (Final Report). Attrition from
Mathematics as a Social Process.
McGee-Brown, M., Martin, C., Monsaas, J., & Stombler, M. (2003). What scientists do: Science Olympiad enhancing
science inquiry through student collaboration, problem solving, and creativity. Annual National Science Teachers
Association meeting, Philadelphia, PA.
Melchior, A., Burack, C., Gutbezahl, J., Hoover, M., & Marcus, J. (2015). FIRST longitudinal study: Summary of pre-
liminary findings–year 2. Waltham, MA: The Center for Youth and Communities, Brandeis University.
Naizer, G. L. (1993). Science and engineering professors: Why did they choose science as a career? School Science and
Mathematics, 93(6), 321–324.
National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits.
Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, tech-
nology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
Niemi, R., & Smith, J. (2003). The accuracy of students’ reports of course taking in the 1994 national assessment of
educational progress. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(1), 15–21.
Oetting, E., & Beauvais, F. (1990). Adolescent drug use: Findings of national and local surveys. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 58, 385–394.
Olson, L. S. (1985). The North Dakota science and engineering fair–its history and a survey of participants (Unpublished
manuscript). North Dakota State University, Fargo.
Pace, C., Barahona, D., & Kaplan, D. (1985). The credibility of student self-reports. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for
the Study of Evaluation.
Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2006). College major choice: An analysis of person–environment fit. Research in Higher
Education, 47(4), 429–449.
Posner, J. K., & Vandell, D. L. (1999). After-school activities and the development of low-income urban children: A
longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 35(3), 868–879.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science,
technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for america’s future. Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://nsf.gov/
attachments/117803/public/2a--Prepare_and_Inspire--PCAST.pdf
Project Lead The Way. (2011). Our history. Retrieved from http://www.pltw.org/about-us/our-history
Prokop, P., Prokop, M., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2007). Is biology boring? Student attitudes toward biology. Journal of
Biological Education, 42(1), 36–39.
Sahin, A. (2013). STEM clubs and science fair competitions: Effects on post-secondary matriculation. Journal of STEM
Education: Innovations and Research, 14(1), 2–3.
 20 K. MILLER ET AL.

Song, C., & Glick, J. E. (2004). College attendance and choice of college majors among Asian-American students. Social
Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 85(5), 1401–1421.
Sonnert, G., Sadler, P., & Michaels, M. (2013). Gender aspects of participation, support, and success in a state science
fair. School Science and Mathematics, 113(3), 135–143.
Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Life Sciences, 1, 0–2.
Tai, R. H., Sadler, P. M., & Loehr, J. F. (2005). Factors influencing success in introductory college chemistry. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 42(9), 987–1012.
Zaff, J., & Redd, Z. (2001). Logic models and outcomes for out-of-school time programs. Report prepared for the DC
Children and Youth Investment Trust Corporation. Washington, DC: Child Trends.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 22:53 09 December 2017