The Role of Undergraduates’ Math and Science Situated Expectancy-Value Profiles in Science Identity and Persistence

• In Event: The Interplay of Motivation and Identity: Perspectives on How It Matters for Students and Teachers

Abstract

Aspiring scientists often begin college feeling confident in science and perceiving science as valuable (e.g., for a career); thus, they select a STEM-H (science, technology, engineering, math, health) major. Yet, many of these students struggle in college math. Since STEM-H majors often require high-level math courses, students' math and science motivation (e.g., value and competence beliefs in math/science) may factor into their developing science identity. For example, some students may highly value science but lack confidence in math or value math less. How would such a motivation profile shape students’ science identity? The answer is important for creating educational contexts to retain STEM-H students and for advancing theory, since combined science and math motivation beliefs may be integral to developing science identity and persistence. Drawing from Situated Expectancy-Value Theory (SEVT, Eccles & Wigfield, 2020), we examined science undergraduates’ profiles of self-efficacy, perceived values, and perceived costs in math/science and how profiles related to science identity a semester later. Since motivation profiles relate to later persistence (e.g., Lazarides et al. 2021; Perez et al., 2023), we also examined the relations of profiles to students’ subsequent commitment to a science major and enrollment in a STEM-H major.
Participants were 763 undergraduates (demographics in Table 1) enrolled in introductory biology or introductory chemistry at a diverse, southeastern U.S. university. Surveys were administered 7-9 weeks into the fall (2021 or 2022) semester and the next spring (2022 or 2023) semester to assess motivation and the outcomes, respectively.
We used latent profile analysis in Mplus (v.8) to identify profiles and the BCH procedure to examine the relations between profiles and outcomes (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2014). We selected a three-profile solution (Figure 1). Profile 1 (n = 74) was characterized by moderate to high-moderate math and science motivation beliefs. Profile 2 (n = 605) was characterized by high math and science self-efficacy, high science values with moderate math values, and low-moderate science and math costs. Finally, Profile 3 (n = 78) was characterized by high science self-efficacy relative to math, very high science value relative to math, and high-moderate math costs relative to moderate science costs. Students most likely to be assigned to Profile 1 had significantly lower science major commitment and science identity than other profiles, but Profiles 2 and 3 did not differ on these outcomes. All three profiles were significantly different from each other in probability of being in a STEM-H major (Table 2). Students most likely to be assigned to Profile 1 were least likely (.41) and Profile 2 were most likely (.86) to be a STEM-H major.
The results highlight that students taking courses designed for STEM-H majors may have varying levels of math and science SEVT motivation, which relates to their future science identity and STEM-H persistence. While students with lower math motivation relative to science may still perceive themselves as scientists, they may be less likely to ultimately persist in STEM-H. Thus, in some contexts, it may be important to support math motivation to broaden participation in STEM-H disciplines.

Authors

• Tony Perez, Old Dominion University

• Arianna C. White-Levatich, Old Dominion University

• Doug Snuffer, Old Dominion University

• Faith Watrous, Old Dominion University

• John Keane, University of Michigan

• Sharlyn Ferguson-Johnson, Michigan State University

• Lisa Linnenbrink-Garcia, Michigan State University