career aspirations, goal orientation, and classroom anxiety · motivational goal orientation, ... a...

Career aspirations, goal orientation, and classroom anxiety

SOONTHORNPATHAI CHANTARA

a, RAVINDER KOUL

b,

and SITTICHAI KAEWKUEKOOLc

aPhD candidate, Learning Innovation in Technology,

Faculty of Industrial Education and Technology, King Mongkut's University of Technology, Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand

[email protected] aPenn State University, 30 E. Swedesford Road, Malvern, Pa, 1935, USA

cFaculty of Industrial Education and Technology,

King Mongkut's University of Technology, Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract: - This survey study conducted with student volunteers (Males = 519; Females = 904) from six different secondary schools in Thailand investigated the relationship between physics and biology classroom anxiety, motivational goal orientation, and career aspirations. Results of multiple discriminant analyses showed gender differences in the factors that influence the students’ aspirations. Notably, there was an additive effect of multiple goal orientations, biology and physics classroom anxiety and parental education on the aspirations of female students for high earning science, math, and engineering related careers. Use of socio-cognitive and role socialization theories led to an interpretation of data that highlights the significance of cultural beliefs about gender on males’ and females’ perceptions of their own abilities in decision making for careers.

Key-Words: - career aspirations, goal orientation, science classroom anxiety, science and engineering education, high school students’ perceptions, Thailand

1 Introduction

Students’ domain specific beliefs and attitudes contribute to their interests in science and math related fields and their motivation to persist in these fields (e.g., Eccles (Parsons), Adler, & Meece, 1984; Lent, Lopez, Lopez, & Sheu, 2008; Usher & Pajares, 2009; see also Britner & Pajares, 2006; Britner, 2008; Caleon & Subramaniam, 2008; Kahle, Parker, Rennie, & Riley, 1993; Miller, Blessing, & Schwartz, 2006; Penner & Paret, 2008). Socio-cognitive and socio-cultural theories of motivation can be used to interpret motivational beliefs concerning choice of careers (Bandura, 1986; Eccles et al., 1984; Gardner, 1985). These theories focus on the interplay of a variety of personal, environmental, and behavioral variables that are hypothesized to influence the development of basic academic and career interests. Bandura’s self-efficacy model of motivation hypothesizes that four sources shape students’ self-efficacy beliefs and motivational orientation concerning future goals (Bandura, 1986, 1997): 1) Interpretation of past performance (called mastery experiences), 2) modeling of appropriate sex-role behaviors (called vicarious experiences), verbal and non-verbal judgments provided by others (called social persuasion), and 4) interpretation of emotional state (called physiological states or anxiety). Eccles’ expectancy-value model of motivation hypothesizes

that a person will undertake a challenging task (e.g., a career in science and math related areas) only if he or she expects to succeed at it and values the task. Both Bandura’s self-efficacy model and Eccles’ expectancy-value model are similar in placing importance on the influence of socializers (e.g., parental support) and the impact of expectations for success. Their difference is that Bandura’s model gives little attention to the role of the values students assign to the specific fields of careers. Eccles et al. (1984) used their expectancy-value model in USA to predict students decisions to enroll in advanced mathematics courses and Lent et al. (2008) have used Bandura’s self-efficacy model in USA to predict college student interests, and the career choices of engineering students and students in a variety of computing disciplines.

According to socio-cognitive theories, type-of-motivational goal is associated with how one functions behaviorally, cognitively, and emotionally (Elliot & Dweck, 2005). For example, a student might not be motivated to pursue a high earning, science, math or engineering career because he/she lacks self-confidence in science and math ability (Brownlow, Jacobi, & Rogers, 2000; Cassady & Johnson, 2002; Chipman, Krantz, & Silver, 1992). Self-efficacy beliefs have been found to be important factors in lowering the probability for females to pursue math-related

Communication and Management in Technological Innovation and Academic Globalization

ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 133

occupational fields (Crombie, Sinclair, Silverthorn, & Byrne, 2005).

Anxiety, an important aspect of self-efficacy and negative motivation, can be directly debilitating to career choices (Bandura, 1986; Mallow, 1994). Mallow (1994) investigated science anxiety among national samples of Danish and American high school students and found that in both countries females scored significantly higher on a variety of science anxiety measures than males (also Udo, Ramsey, Reynolds-Alpert, & Mallow, 2001; Tobias). Females often conceptualize science and math as demanding, high difficulty subjects even when they receive good grades. Females may have low self-concept, high science anxiety or both that influence their career decisions. Researchers have found that females may perform as well as males on standardized math tests “but perform less well when they worry about the possibility of confirming the stereotypes that women are inferior to men in math” (Guimond, & Roussel, 2001, p. 276). Brownlow et al. (2000) noted that “high math ability does not predict pursuit of science as strongly as lack of math anxiety, suggesting that beliefs about abilities may be more important than performance in determining whether a woman will pursue scientific endeavors” (p. 120). In these studies, researchers have used general measures called “science anxiety” and “math anxiety”, and often, “math anxiety” has served as an indicator of physics or physical science classroom anxiety.

Students may have a different motivational orientation towards each science content area: For example, Klainin (1985) found that biology was seen as a subject better suited for females by more than 70% of Thai male and female students, while physics was seen as a subject more suited for males by more than 90% of male and female students (see Fensham, 1986). Different levels of biology classroom anxiety and physics classroom anxiety are important indicators of negative motivation that may deter males and females from choosing a science, math or engineering profession. Research has also found that students may hold multiple goals at the same time and the ways these goals are organized and coordinated is substantially related to levels of anxiety, academic performance, and achievement (e.g., Dowson & McInerney, 2003; Wentzel, 2000).

Our investigation was designed to answer the following research questions:

1. What are the predominant goal orientations of the participating male and female students?

2. How do measures of goal orientation correlate with measures of biology classroom anxiety and physics classroom anxiety?

3. How do measures of goal orientation and levels of classroom anxiety associate with the career aspirations of high school students?

Our findings will contribute to empirical knowledge about motivational factors that have been shown to relate closely to the career choices of students. Information on gender differences may yield implications for science curricular designers and policy makers.

2 Method

2.1 Participants The educational system in Thailand consists of six years of primary education (called Prathom), followed by three years of lower secondary education (called Mathayom 1, 2 and 3), and three years of upper secondary education (called Mathayom 4, 5, and 6). At the end of lower secondary education, students are tracked into an academic or vocational stream. We collected survey data from six different schools in central and north-eastern regions of Thailand. All survey participants were enrolled in the upper secondary academic science-math stream. More than 94% of responses to our survey were complete (N =1438, Males = 38%; Females = 62%).

2.2 Instruments The first section of the survey asked for general information (e.g., GPA, socio-economic status, mother’s education, father’s education) and career aspirations. The second section of the survey assessed perceived support for studying science (6 items, e.g., “Does your mother want you to study science?”) and motivational goal orientation (17 items, e.g., “knowledge of science will broaden my general outlook”). The motivational goal orientation items reflected instrumental, socio-cultural, mastery, and performance goal orientations toward science and were adapted for the context of science teaching and learning from previous goal orientation surveys (e.g., Koul, Roy, Kaewkuekool, & Ploisawachai, 2009). The third section of the survey on biology and physics classroom anxiety (27 items, e.g., “I am usually uneasy during tests in my biology class”) was adapted from Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Questionnaires developed by Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) and Aida (1994) (see also Koul et al., 2009). We chose biology and physics classroom anxiety because biology and physics are the two science content areas that have been shown to reflect “gender related expectations of competence” or “cultural beliefs” (For example, Correll (2001) has discussed a common “gender stereotype” that females


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 134

have the aptitude for biology but lack the math aptitude needed for physics and found that such “cultural beliefs about gender” biased personal perceptions of competence at various career-relevant tasks). We used a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5) with larger value indicating a stronger perceived level of biology and physics classroom anxiety.

Bandura and Eccles’ socio-cognitive models of motivation informed the development of our survey questionnaire. The goal orientation items in our survey measured motivational orientation toward the value of science. We used the participants’ prior GPA as an indicator of perceived mastery experiences because the Thai system emphasizes grades as the most meaningful

indicators of an individual’s competence. “Perceived social support for studying science” was a measure of social persuasion. We asked students to rate the encouragement to study science they receive in messages from relatives (mother, father, brothers, and sisters), friends, and teachers. The parental levels of education were indicators of vicarious experiences because each served as an indicator of the degree to which students were exposed to home role models with demonstrated educational competence. We used students’ physiological and affective states measured by biology classroom anxiety and physics classroom anxiety as indicators of domain-specific self-efficacy beliefs.

Table 1

Goal orientations toward science: Factor pattern structure matrix rotated to Varimax criterion (N =1438)

Items Factor1 Factor 2 Factor 3

INSTRUMENTAL ORIENTATION TOWARD SCIENCE

1. Knowledge of science will broaden my general outlook .663

2. Knowledge of science will help me learn about the world in a global context .609

3. Knowledge of science is part of being educated .624

4. Knowledge of science will help me make sense of world events .697

5. I like science because it teaches me new things .691

6. It is important to me to learn scientific principles .677

7. Knowledge of science will benefit my job opportunities .701

8. Knowledge of science will help me become a wise person .636

9. I feel more knowledgeable when I learn scientific principles .645

PERFORMANCE ORIENTATION TOWARD SCIENCE

10. I feel good when I am considered better with scientific matters than other people .612

11. I feel very good when I can show that I have excellent understanding of science compared

to other people

.731

12. It is particularly important to me that my friends think that I am good with scientific

matters

.817

13. It is important for me to impress other people concerning scientific matters .734

14. The opinion others have about my knowledge of science is important to me .727

15. I prefer to work on projects where I can prove my understanding of science to other

people

.688

SOCIO-CULTURAL ORIENTATION TOWARD SCIENCE

16. Knowledge of science will help me think/behave like a member of a scientific community .671

17. Knowledge of science will help me understand historical developments in various

countries and cultures

.836


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 135

Table 2

Biology and Physics classroom anxiety: Factor pattern structure matrix rotated to Varimax criterion (N =1438)

Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4

FEAR OF FAILING BIOLOGY

1. I frightens me when I don’t understand what the teacher is saying in the

biology class

.651

2. I am usually uneasy during tests in my biology class .710

3. I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in biology class .679

4. I get nervous when biology teacher asks questions which I have not prepared

in advance

.646

5. Even if I am well prepared for biology class, I feel anxious about it .691

6. My biology class moves so quickly I worry about falling behind .631

7. I feel more tense and nervous in my biology class than in my other classes .714

8. I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my biology class .682

9. The more I study for a biology test, the more confused I get .666

FEAR OF FAILING PHYSICS

10. I worry about the consequences of failing my physics class .643

11. My physics class moves so quickly I worry about falling behind .696

12. In physics class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know .502

13. I always feel that the other students know physics better than I do .789

14. I keep thinking that the other students are better at physics than I am .764

15. I get nervous when I don’t understand every concept the physics teacher says .603

16. It frightens me when I don’t understand what the teacher is saying in the

physics class

.598

17. I am usually uneasy during tests in my physics class .661

FEAR OF NEGATIVE EVALUATION IN BIOLOGY AND PHYSICS

18. I am afraid that others will not approve my level of knowledge in biology .684

19. I am afraid that people will find fault with my knowledge of biology .781

20. I am worried about what kind of impression I make in my biology class .761

21. I am afraid that people will find fault with my knowledge of physics .775

22. I am worried about what kind of impression I make in my physics class .758

TALKING PHYSICS ANXIETY

23. I tremble when I know that I am going to be called on in my physics class .792

24. It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my physics class .766

25. I get nervous and confused when I am speaking in my physics class .778

26. I can feel my heart pounding when I am going to be called on in my physics

class

.788

2.3 Analysis

To determine interrelationship among survey items, principle component analysis with Varimax rotation was performed on the goal orientation and anxiety sections of the survey. In extracting factors, we choose all the factors with eigenvalues greater than 1. Since the significance of a loading gives little indication of the

substantive importance of a variable to a factor, we interpreted only factor loadings with an absolute value greater than .4 which explains around 16% of the variance in the variable (Stevens, 1992). Cronbach’s alpha, the most common measure of scale reliability, was calculated separately for each subscale. Factor loadings ranged from .502 to .836. We used the


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 136

Anderson-Rubin method to calculate scores on each factor for each individual. Each factor score was used for correlation analysis, analysis of variance, and discriminant analysis.

Prior research findings suggest that the considerations involved in making career choices, particularly in the high earning math and science fields, substantially differ with gender (Crombie et al., 2005; Hanson, Schaub, & Baker, 1996). Hanson et al. (1996) conducted a comparative analysis of gender stratification in the science pipeline in seven countries. They found that in spite of gender equality of access to biology, physics and math programs at the high school level, there was still gender stratification in science

occupations in every country examined. They concluded their findings suggest that factors other than training help to maintain inequality in high-status science occupations. In our investigation in Thailand, we found that male and female students had equal access to biology, physics and chemistry programs at the high school level (the ratio of female to male enrollment in this stream at each of the five secondary schools varied from 1:1 to 3:2). In order to discover which variables contribute to their respective aspirations for high earning science, math and engineering professions, we conducted a separate discriminant analysis for male and female groups.

Fig. 1

Goal orientation as a function of gender

-0,15

-0,1

-0,05

0

0,05

0,1

Instrumental goal

orientation

Performance goal

orientation

Socioc-cultural goal

orientation

Estim

ate

d F

acto

r s

co

re

s

MALE

FEMALE


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 137

Fig. 2

Biology and physics classroom anxiety as a function of gender

Fig. 3

Goal orientation and career aspirations

-0,3

-0,25

-0,2

-0,15

-0,1

-0,05

0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

Fear of failing

biology

Fear of failing

physics

Fear of being

negatively

evaluated in

physics and

biology

Talking physics

anxiety

Estim

ate

d F

acto

r S

co

re

s

MALE

FEMALE

-0,15

-0,1

-0,05

0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

Instrumental goal

orientation

Performance goal

orientation

Socio-cultural goal

orientation

Estim

ate

d F

acto

r S

co

re

s

HESME professions

Non-HESME professions


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 138

Fig. 4

Biology and physics classroom anxiety and career aspirations

3 Results After factor analysis of goal orientation items, the rotated matrix showed three factors accounting for 55.7% of variance: The “instrumental” goal orientation factor (9 items, “knowledge of science will benefit my job opportunities”), the “performance” goal orientation factor (6 items, “it is particularly important to me that my friends think that I am good with scientific matters”), and the “socio-cultural” goal orientation factor (2 items, “knowledge of science will help me understand historical developments in various countries and cultures”). We found that the “instrumental” goal orientation sub-scale included “mastery” goal orientation items (e.g., “I like science because it teaches me new things”). Alpha value for the instrumental goal orientation, performance goal orientation, and socio-cultural goal orientation sub-scales were .88, .87, and .59, respectively.

After factor analysis of biology and physics classroom anxiety items, the rotated matrix showed three factors accounting for 68.13% of variance. Based on the content of the items within each factor, we labeled four types of science anxiety as “fear of failing biology”, “fear of failing physics”, “fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and physics”, and “talking physics anxiety”. “Fear of failing biology” or “biology classroom/exam related anxiety” had 9 items

(e.g., “I am usually uneasy during tests in my biology class”), “fear of failing physics” or “physics classroom/exam related anxiety” had 8 items (e.g., “I am usually uneasy during tests in my physics class”), “fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and physics” had 6 items (e.g., “I am worried about what kind of impression I make in my physics class”), and “talking physics anxiety” or frustration or apprehension arising from inability to comprehend or express oneself in the physics classroom had 4 items (e.g., “It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my physics class”). Alpha values for “fear of failing biology”, “fear of failing physics”, “fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and physics”, and “talking physics anxiety” subscales were .932, .906, .923, and .904, respectively.

We found that females were more oriented towards instrumental goals than males and the difference was statistically significant, F = 18.61, p < .01 (see also Figure 1). Males were more oriented toward socio-cultural goals than females but the difference was not significant. Males were also more performance goal oriented than females and the difference was statistically significant, F = 6.99, p < .01. Females reported higher levels of “fear of failing biology” and “fear of failing physics” and the difference was statistically significant, F = 3.93 (p <.05) and F = 78.96 (p < .01), respectively. Males reported higher levels of “fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and

-0,12

-0,1

-0,08

-0,06

-0,04

-0,02

0

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

Fear of

failing

biology

Fear of

failing

physics

Fear of being

negatively

evaluated in

biology and

physics

Talking

physics

anxiety

Estim

ate

d F

acto

r S

co

re

s

HESME professions

Non-HESME professions


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 139

physics”, and the difference was statistically significant, F = 26.65, p < .01 (see also Figure 2). Motivational orientations were also associated with self-reported levels of biology and physics classroom anxiety: Instrumental goals were moderately associated with increased “fear of failing physics” (r = .202, p < .01) and performance goals were moderately associated with increased “fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and physics” (r = .216, p <.01).

Table 1 is a list of the first sixteen career choices out of seventy-five stated by the participants in this study. Engineering and medicine were the top two professional

field choices for males. Medicine and nursing were the top two professional field choices for females. Overall, females had higher mean grade-point-average (GPA) than males (Mean GPA for females and males was 3.28 and 3.05, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant, F = 18.24, p < .01). In spite of higher mean GPA, many more females than males aspired to traditional service professions with low pay (e.g., 10.7% of females aspired to nursing, a low paid health science profession in Thailand with $200 mean monthly salary).

Table 3

Career aspirations of male and female high school students

MALES FEMALES

Top sixteen professions Percentage

(N = 519)

Top sixteen professions Percentage

(N =904)

1. Engineering* 26.0% Medicine* 12.7%

2. Medicine* 9.0% Nursing** 10.7%

3. Law** 7.7% Pharmacy* 9.6%

4. Science* 4.6% Law** 6.4%

5. Architecture** 4.2% Engineering* 5.4%

6. Political science 2.9% Communication** 4.6%

7. Mathematics* 2.5% Dentistry* 4.5%

8. Business ** 2.5% Architecture** 4.4%

9. Economics** 2.1% Science* 4.2%

10. Pharmacy* 2.1% Business ** 3.8%

11. Accountancy** 2.1% Humanities** 3.6%

12. Dentist* 1.5% Liberal arts** 2.5%

13. Communication** 1.5% Education** 2.3%

14. Education** 1.3% Political science** 1.7%

15. Liberal arts** 1.3% Accountancy** 1.7%

16. Arts** 1.0% Math* .5%

*High earning science, math,

and engineering (HESME)

professions

48.2% *HESME professions 36.9%

**Non-HESME professions 51.8% **Non-HESME professions 63.1%


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 140

Table 4

Univariate F ratios and Wilks’s Lambda for predictor variables

GROUP VARIABLE TYPE Wilks’s

lambda

F ratio df Sig.

MALE

(N =519)

Instrumental goal orientation .94 29.22 466 .000**

Performance goal orientation .99 3.70 466 .055

Socio-cultural goal orientation .99 .48 466 .489

Fear of failing biology .99 1.30 466 .255

Fear of failing physics .99 .73 466 .393

Fear of negative evaluation .99 1.16 466 .281

Physics talking anxiety 1.00 .02 466 .901

GPA .94 27.98 466 .000**

SES .99 .24 466 .626

Father’s education .99 1.42 466 .233

Mother’s education .99 2.16 466 .142

Perceived social support for

studying sciences

.94 28.11 466 .000**

FEMALE

(N =904)

Instrumental goal orientation .98 19.83 877 .000**

Performance goal orientation .98 9.99 877 .002**

Socio-cultural goal orientation .99 6.52 877 .011*

Fear of failing biology .99 9.23 877 .002**

Fear of failing physics 1.0 .34 877 .562

Fear of negative evaluation .99 4.89 877 .027*

Physics talking anxiety .99 8.13 877 .004**

GPA .94 60.26 877 .000**

SES .99 1.94 877 .164

Father’s education .99 3.96 877 .047*

Mother’s education .99 5.84 877 .016*

Perceived social support for

studying sciences

.943 52.66 877 .000**

**p<.01, *p<.05


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 141

Table 5

Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients and Structure Coefficients for predictor variables

in male and female groups

GROUP Predictor variable Standardized

coefficient

Structure

coefficient

MALE (N =519)a

Instrumental goal orientation .49 .68

GPA .48 .67

Perceived social support for studying sciences .35 .67

FEMALE (N =904)b

Instrumental goal orientation .16 .40

Performance goal orientation .21 .29

Socio-cultural goal orientation .14 .23

Fear of failing biology -.17 -.28

Fear of negative evaluation -.22 -.20

Physics talking anxiety -.21 -.26

GPA .56 .70

Father’s education .01 .18

Mother’s education .17 .22

Perceived social support for studying sciences .39 .66

aFor males, Group centroids were .373 for students aspiring for HESME professions and -.383 for Non-HESME professions bFor females, Group centroids are .491 for students aspiring for HESME professions and -.283 for Non-HESME professions.

Prior researchers have concluded that aspirations for

high earning science, math, and engineering professions provide lens through which to focus on cultural beliefs and their influence on the career decisions of males and females (see Correll, 2001; Zeldin, & Pajares, 2000). Hence, we used mean monthly salary to code each profession of aspiration as a high earning science, math or engineering (HESME) or non-HESME profession. General physician ($1218), dentist ($925), engineer ($962), and pharmacist ($700) were coded as high earning professions (see www.worldsalaries. org/thailand.shtml), the low-earning science-related professions, such as nursing ($200), and all other professions were coded as non-HESME. There was a higher proportion of females enrolled in the science-math academic stream in each of the six secondary schools but only 36.9% of Thai female students aspired to the HESME professions while 48.2% of Thai male students chose a HESME profession.

Students aspiring to HESME professions were more instrumental, performance and socio-cultural goal oriented and reported lower levels of biology and physics anxieties than the students aspiring to a Non-HESME profession (see Figures 3 and 4). In order to find influence variables that discriminate the student choice between HEMSE and Non-HEMSE profession,

we conducted discriminant function analyses. Boxes’ test was insignificant and all log determinants were very similar, implying that the homogeneity of variance assumption was met (Stevens, 1992). For the male group, Wilks’ Lambda = .880, Chi-square = 58.64, p<.01. For the female group, Wilks’ Lambda = .878, Chi-square = .878, p <.01. Discriminant analyses yielded a canonical correlation of .37 for the male group and .42 for the female group, explaining about 16% of variance in the student choice between HESME profession and non-HESME profession. Table 4 shows univariate F ratios and Wilks’s lambda for each of the 12 influence variables.

For males, 3 variables showed statistically significant differences in means between choosing a HEMSE profession and a Non-HEMSE profession, and the classification results showed that 71% of the cases were correctly classified. For females, 10 variables showed statistically significant differences in means between choosing a HEMSE profession and a Non-HEMSE profession, and the classification results showed that 68% of the cases were correctly classified.

Table 5 shows the standardized coefficients and structure coefficients of each influence variable for the male and female groups. For both males and females, an instrumental goal orientation toward science, past


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 142

GPA, and perceived social support for science were the three important variables that discriminated the aspiration to HESME professions versus other professions. Additional influence factors were found only among females—mother’s education, father’s education, performance goal orientation, socio-cultural goal orientation, fear of failing biology, fear of negative evaluation in biology and physics, and physics talking anxiety (see Table 5).

4 Discussion

While socio-cognitive theories of motivation helped us to interpret our general findings on the relationships between goal orientation, levels of biology and physics classroom anxiety and career aspirations of Thai high school students, role socialization theory and social reproduction theory help to interpret the gender difference in our results (Bourdieu, 1973; Correll, 2008; Dumais, 2002).

Previous research conducted in North America has found that occupational choice is influenced by the value students attach to a specific subject area (e.g., Eccles et al., 1984; Watt, 2005). For example, in a longitudinal study of intellectually able, college-bound students, researchers found that the decision to enroll in advanced mathematics was mediated by gender differences of value assigned to mathematics (Eccles et al., 1984; Eccles, 1994). Eccles et. al found that female students in USA were less likely than males to enroll in mathematics, primarily because they felt that math was less important. Other researchers have also found that gender differences in intrinsic values for science and math influence enrollment decisions (Watt, 2005, p. 26).

In this investigation in Thailand, we found that while both male and female high school students assigned high value to the benefits of science, there were significant differences in the motivational orientation of males and females. Females were significantly more instrumental goal oriented, significantly more motivated by intrinsic and utilitarian benefits of science, that is, the value of studying science for self-improvement and academic and career progress. Males were significantly more performance goal oriented, significantly more motivated by a desire to study science based on normative considerations, that is, to impress others, to gain public recognition, a sense of superiority and self-enhancement of ego. Comparatively, most studies in USA have shown that females adopt higher levels of mastery goals than males (Hyde & Durik, 2005). Only one USA study found as we did in Thailand that males adopted higher levels of performance goals than females, and this was within the context of math learning (see Hyde & Durik, 2005). The performance

goals adopted by males in our study were consistent with the academic and professional climate in Thailand. As in other Asian countries, social comparison is given more importance than self-comparison (Chang, 1999; Shih & Alexander, 2000). Gender roles are highly defined in Thai society, it is possible that the stereotype of the desirable female as non-competitive discourages females from adopting performance goals (King, Miles, & Kniska, 1991).

Past research has found that mastery goal orientation or intrinsic motivation is adaptive for different types of cognitive and behavioral outcomes but performance goal orientation or extrinsic motivation may be either adaptive or maladaptive (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2007). In our study, we found that an instrumental goal orientation toward science contributed positively to the choice of a HESME profession for both males and females (standardized coefficients were .49 for males and .16 for females). We found further, a positive aspect of performance and socio-cultural goal orientations on the females only. There was an additive effect of performance goals (i.e. demonstration of competence concerning scientific matters) and socio-cultural goals (i.e. thinking and behaving like a member of scientific community) on females’ choice of a HESME profession.

Gardner’s theory of motivation (Gardner, 1985) helped us to interpret the importance of socio-cultural goals for females in our study. Gardner described individual differences in motivation to learn a second language in terms of instrumental and integrative goal orientations. Instrumental goals reflect a desire to learn a second language for academic purposes, passing an exam, furthering professional career, seeking financial benefits, etc. Integrative goals reflect a desire to learn a second language for the purpose of communicating with or becoming part of a target community. Science is a global language. In terms of Gardner’s theory, a disposition for integrative goals, “some sort of psychological and emotional identification” with the culture of science would be an essential aspect of learning science. The integrative goal for studying science means “integration with the global scientific community”.

Past research by Linnenbrink, Ryan and Pintrich (2000) has shown that the emotional implications of goal orientations are different: Mastery goals or intrinsic motivation are more positively related to students’ psychological wellness; performance goals or extrinsic motivation are more positively related to the dis-ease of stress and anxiety (Elliot & Dweck, 2005). We found significant associations between performance goal orientation and the fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and physics. We also found that students who chose HSEME professions reported lower


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 143

levels of biology and physics classroom anxiety. These results are consistent with findings of previous researchers that affective responses to mathematics influence the selection of careers in math (Chipman et al., 1992). Past studies have found that females generally report higher levels of math anxiety than males (Cassady, & Johnson, 2002; Engenhard, 1990). High levels of math anxiety among females have been explained in terms of three factors: 1) gender differences in scholastic ability, 2) perceptions of threat to evaluative situations, and 3) higher levels of emotionality component among females (See Cassady, & Johnson, 2002, p. 274-275). In our investigation, female students had higher mean GPA than males, therefore, gender differences in scholastic ability do not explain higher levels of biology and physics classroom anxiety among Thai female students. Our data did not measure levels of this component, however, it may be that higher levels of emotionality component for females contribute to significantly higher levels of “fear of failing biology”, “fear of failing physics”, and “talking physics anxiety”. Notably, we found that males, not females, reported significantly high levels of “fear of being negatively evaluated in biology and physics”. This may be related to the performance goal orientation of male students who were much more concerned about social comparison.

Results of multiple discriminant analyses showed that “fear of failing biology”, “fear of being negatively evaluated” and “Physics talking anxiety” had a negative influence on females’ aspirations for HESME but had no effect on the males’ aspirations. Females reported significantly higher levels of “fear of failing physics” but this anxiety did not influence their career aspirations. Levels of mother’s and father’s education were additional influence factors on females’ choice but had no effect on males’ choice. Such gender differences can be understood in terms of role socialization theory and social reproduction theory (Bourdieu, 1973).

Role socialization theory considers socially shared expectations about actual and ideal behavior for women and men, how gender identity is established and how males and females reach puberty with different interpersonal orientations and social experiences. According to role socialization theory, career choices are primarily influenced by characteristics of the parents (e.g., women tend to copy their mothers, men copy their fathers). Women are likely to choose occupations that can easily be combined with family and child rearing and which increase their productivity in both the marketplace and home (e.g., teaching) (e.g., Becker, 1981; Storen, & Arnesen, 2007). Social reproduction theory describes the effects of cultural capital, cultural resources and habitus (one’s orientation towards resources) on the actual behavior of males and females

(e.g., career aspirations) (Biraimah, 1994; Bourdieu, 1973; Dumais, 2002).

We found that students who aspire to high earning, science, math and engineering fields may not be the best qualified for careers requiring science and math proficiency. In our study, males aspired to HESME professions at a higher rate than females not because they valued science more than females or because they had higher grade-point-averages than females. They did so partly because they perceived they were simply better suited for HESME professions (see also Correll, 2008).

Shelley Correll (2008) has used status characteristics theory to investigate the constraining effect of cultural beliefs about gender on career aspirations. Results of her survey and experimental investigations found that “individuals form aspirations by drawing on perceptions of their own competence at career-relevant tasks, and the perceptions men and women form are differentially biased by cultural beliefs about gender” (Correll, 2008, p. 111). Correll (2008) concluded that gender impacts the performance expectations of men and women—males overestimate their own performance while females underestimate their own performance—which influence their emerging aspirations.

In this investigation, we found that biology and physics classroom anxiety were influence factors on the career aspirations of females, but not males. This difference may be rooted in Thai cultural beliefs about the greater suitability of males to undertake science and math related careers. Compared to males, females occupy a low value state in science and math subject areas. Additionally, females may see their own performance as less competent than males, even if they may have higher mean GPA scores than males. According to status characteristics theory, males tend to use a lenient standard to assess self-competence whereas females critically scrutinize their self-competence (Correll, 2008). If this is so, it is understandable that females in our study, not males, found their emotional states were a source of information about their competency for high earning science, math and engineering careers. Increased levels of biology and physics classroom anxiety negatively impacted the aspirations of females for HESME professions. A high level of parental education positively influenced the career aspirations of females, but not males. In light of these differences, family role models and persuaders become especially critical sources of self-efficacy beliefs for females. The findings in our study draw attention to the socio-cultural aspects of motivational goal orientation and classroom anxiety that affect the perceptions males and females have of their own abilities at crucial decision making junctures.


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 144

Acknowledgement We are extremely grateful to Barbara E. Coon for her help and critical feedback. References:

[1] Y. Aida, Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope’s construct of foreign language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. Modern Language

Journal, Vol.78, 1994, pp.155-168. [2] A. Bandura, Social foundations of thought and

action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1986.

[3] G. Becker, A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

[4] K. Biraimah, Class, gender, and societal inequalities: A study of Nigerian and Thai undergraduate students. Higher Education, Vol.27, 1994, pp. 41-58.

[5] P. Bourdieu, Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. Brown (Ed.), Knowledge, education and cultural change (pp. 71-112), London: Tavistock, 1973.

[6] S. L. Britner, Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical and earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.45, No.8, 2008, pp.955-970.

[7] S. L. Britner and F. Pajares, Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.43,

No.5, 2006, pp.485-499. [8] S. Brownlow, T. Jacobi and M. Rogers, Science

anxiety as a function of gender and experience. Sex Roles, Vol.42, 2000, pp.119-131.

[9] I. S. Caleon and R. Subramaniam, Attitudes towards science of intellectually gifted and mainstream upper primary students in Singapore. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.45, No.8, 2008, pp.940-954.

[10] J. C. Cassady and R. E. Johnson, Cognitive test anxiety and academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol.27, 2002, pp.270-295.

[11] S. F. Chang, S. F, Learning motivation in a junior high school EFL context in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, 1999.

[12] F. S. Chipman, H. D. Krantz and R. Silver, Mathematics anxiety and science careers among able college women. Psychological Science, Vol.3, No.5, 1992, pp. 292-295.

[13] S. J. Correll, Gender and the career choice process: The role of biases self-assessments. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 6, 2001, pp.1697-1730.

[14] S. J. Correll, Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review, Vol.69, 2008, pp.93-113.

[15] G. Crombie, N. Sinclair, N. Silverthorn and B. M. Byrne, Predictors of young adolescents’ math grades and course enrollment intentions: Gender similarities and differences. Sex Role, Vol.52, 2005, pp.351-367.

[16] M. Dowson and M. M. McInerney, What do students say about their motivational goals?: Towards a more complex and dynamic perspective on student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol.28, 2003, pp.91-113.

[17] S. A. Dumais, Cultural capital, gender, and school success: The role of habitus. Sociology of

Education, Vol.75, No.1, 2002, pp. 44-68. [18] J. Eccles (Parsons), T. Adler and J. L. Meece, Sex

differences in achievement: A test of alternate theories. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, Vol.46, 1984, pp.26-43. [19] S. J. Eccles, Understanding women’s educational

and occupational choices: Applying Eccles et al. Model of achievement related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol.18, 1994, pp.585-609.

[20] A. J. Elliot and C. Dweck, Competence and motivation. New York : Guilford Press, 2005.

[21] G. Engenhard, Math anxiety: Mother’s education, and the mathematics performance of adolescent boys and girls: Evidence from the United States and Thailand. Journal of Psychology, Vol.124, 1990, pp.289-297.

[22] P. J. Fensham, Lessons from science education in Thailand: A case of study of gender and learning in the physical sciences. Research in Science

Education, Vol.16, No.1, 1986, pp.92-100. [23] R. C. Gardner, Social psychology and second

language learning: The role of attitudes and

motivation. London: Edward Arnold, 1985. [24] S. Guimond and L. Roussel, Bragging about one’s

school grades: Gender stereotyping and students’ perceptions of their abilities in science, math and language. Social Psychology of Education, Vol. 4, 2001, pp.275-293.

[25] S. Hanson, M. Schaub and D. P. Baker, Gender stratification in the pipeline: A comparative analysis of seven countries. Gender and Society, Vol.10, No.3, 1996, pp.271-290.

[26] M. B. Horwitz, E. K. Horwitz and J. A. Cope, Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern

Language Journal, Vol.70, No.2, 1986, pp.125-132.


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 145

[27] S. J. Hyde and M. A. Durik, Gender, competence, and motivation. In Andrew J. Elliot and Carol S. Dweck (Eds.). Competence and motivation. New York : Guilford Press, 2005.

[28] B. J. Kahle, H. L. Parker, J. L. Rennie and D. Riley, Gender differences in science education: Building a model. Educational Psychologist, Vol.28, No.4, 1993, pp.379-404.

[29] W. C. King, E. W. Miles and J. Kniska, Boys will be boys (and girls will be girls): The attribution of girls’ role stereotypes in a gaming situation. Sex Roles, Vol.25, 1991, pp.607-623.

[30] R. Koul, L. Roy, S. Kaewkuekool and S. Ploisawaschai, Multiple goal orientations and foreign language anxiety. System, Vol.37, 2009, pp.676-688.

[31] R. W. Lent, A. M. Lopez, F. G. Lopez and H. Sheu, Social cognitive career theory and the prediction of interests and choice goals in the computing disciplines. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, Vol.73, 2008, pp. 52-62. [32] E. Linnenbrink, A. Ryna and P. R. Pintrinch, The

role of goals and affect in working memory functioning. Learning and Individual Differences, Vol.11, 2000, pp.213-230.

[33] J. V. Mallow, Gender-related science anxiety: A first binational study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol.3, No.4, 1994, pp.227-238.

[34] P. H. Miller, J. S. Blessing and S. Schwartz, Gender differences in high-school students’ views of science. International Journal of Science

Education, Vol.28, No.4, 2006, pp.362-381. [35] K. M. Udo, P. G. Ramsey, S. Reynolds-Alpert and

V. J. Mallow, Does physics teaching affect gender-based science anxiety. Journal of Science

Education and Technology, Vol.10, No.3, 2001, pp.237-247.

[36] M. A. Penner and M. Paret, Gender differences in mathematics achievement: Exploring the early grades and the extremes. Social Science Research, Vol.37, 2008, pp.239-253.

[37] D. H. Schunk, P. R. Pintrich and J. Meece, Motivation in education: Theory, research, and

applications (3rd Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc., 2007.

[38] S. Shih and J. M. Alexander, Interacting effects of goal setting and self- or other referenced feedback on children’s development of self-efficacy and cognitive skills within the Taiwanese classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.92, 2000, pp. 536-543.

[39] J. Stevens, Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd edition). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992.

[40] A. L. Storen and A. C. Arnesen, Women’s and men’s choice of higher education—what explains the persistence of sex segregation in Norway. Studies in Higher Education,Vol.32, No.2, 2007, pp. 253-275.

[41] E. L. Usher and F. Pajares, Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol.34, 2009, pp.89-101.

[42] M. G. H. Watt, Explaining gendered math enrollments for NSW Australian secondary school students. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, Vol. 110, 2005, pp.15-29.

[43] K. R. Wentzel, What is it that I’m trying to achieve? Classroom goals from a content perspective. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, Vol.25, 2000, pp.105-115. [44] A. L. Zeldin and F. Pajares, Against the odds: Self-

efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific, and technological careers. American Educational Research Journal, Vol.37, No.1, 2000, pp. 215-246.


ISBN: 978-960-474-254-7 146

career aspirations, goal orientation, and classroom anxiety · motivational goal orientation, ... a...

Documents