Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Becoming a Scientist—Career Choice Characteristics


Decisions related to career choice are influenced by person’s interactions with his or her environment. The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics of a STEM (Science-Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) career choice. The study included two stages in which two different questionnaires were used. The purpose of the first questionnaire, which was replied by 1162 people, was to examine their attitudes towards STEM, and their sense of employment capability in this field. The data were analyzed according to three age groups: 12th graders, young adults aged 21–35, and adults over the age of 35. The second stage focused on three sub-groups: young high school graduates with a high affinity to STEM studies, whom have not yet chosen career; adults who have chosen career as researchers in the STEM field; and adults who have chosen career as researchers in the social sciences and humanities. The second questionnaire examined environmental characteristics and attitudes towards the factors potentially influencing a career choice in STEM. The results indicate that the attitudes towards STEM and the sense of employment capability in this field become significantly more positive with age. The number of family members who have a STEM career was not found to be a significant factor influencing a career choice; however, a significant correlation was found between high school major and the career chosen by graduates. The research findings point to important trends that shed light on the process of choosing a career in STEM and concludes that young people’s interest in science during school is a key variable to sparking interest in science careers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    In Israel, students choose specialization subjects (usually 2–3) in the 10th grade. These subjects are taught parallel to common core mandatory subjects.


  1. Abrahams, I. (2009). Does practical work really motivate? A study of the affective value of practical work in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 2335–2353.

  2. Ardies, J., Maeyer, S. D., & Gijbels, D. (2015). A longitudinal study on boys’ and girls’ career aspirations and interest in technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 33(3), 366–386.

  3. Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation, and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 564–582.

  4. Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4, 359–373.

  5. Barab, S. A., & Hay, K. E. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of experts: Issues related to the science apprenticeship camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 70–102.

  6. Barro, J. R. (2001). Human capital: Growth, history, and policy. The American Economic Review, 91(2), 12–17.

  7. Burgin, S. R., & Sadler, T. D. (2016). Learning nature of science concepts through a research apprenticeship program: A comparative study of three approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(1), 31–59.

  8. Cavallo, A. M. L., & Laubach, T. (2001). Students’ science perceptions and enrollment decisions in differing learning cycle classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1029–1062.

  9. Cleaves, A. (2005). The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 471–486.

  10. Dabney, K. P., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., Miller-Friedmann, J. L., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2012). Out-of-school time science activities and their association with career interest in STEM. International Journal of Science Education, 2(1), 63–79.

  11. Dabney, K., Chakraverty, D., & Tai, R. H. (2013). The association of family influence and initial interest in science. Science Education, 97, 395–409.

  12. DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601.

  13. Fensham, P. J. (2008). Science education policy-making. Paris, France: UNESCO.

  14. Gayles, J. G., & Ampaw, F. D. (2011). Gender matters: An examination of differential effects of the college experience on degree attainment in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 152, 19–25.

  15. Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D., & Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2009-001 Revised). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

  16. Hampden-Thompson, G., & Bennett, J. (2013). Science teaching and learning activities and students’ engagement in science. International Journal of Science Education, 35(8), 1325–1343.

  17. Hanushek, E., & Kimko, D. D. (2000). Schooling labor-force quality and the growth of nations. The American Economic Review, 90, 1208–1184.

  18. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111–127.

  19. Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2002). Effect of the challenger experience on elementary children’s attitudes to science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 979–1000.

  20. Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2005). Factors influencing elementary school children’s attitudes toward science before, during, and after a visit to the UK National Space Centre. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 53–83.

  21. Kearney, C. (2011). Efforts to increase students’ interest in pursuing mathematics, science and technology studies and careers. European schoolnet (EUN partnership AISBL) Brussels. Available at: http://spice.eun.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_l_id=16292&folderId=16435&name=DLFE-9323.pdf. Accessed 12 Feb 2019

  22. Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 27–50.

  23. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 36–49.

  24. 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.

  25. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31, 313–327.

  26. Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2010). Eyeballs in the fridge: Sources of early interest in science. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 669–685.

  27. Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: The effects of school experiences on earning degrees in STEM. Science Education, 95, 877–907.

  28. Maltese, A. V., Melki, C. S., & Wiebke, H. L. (2014). The nature of experiences responsible for the generation and maintenance of interest in STEM. Science Education, 98, 937–962.

  29. Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1997). Coursework selection: Relations to academic self-concept and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 691–720.

  30. Martin, A. J. (2001). The student motivation scale: A tool for measuring and enhancing motivation. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 11, 1–20.

  31. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London, England: King’s College.

  32. Neumark, D. (2006). Evaluating program effectiveness: A case study of the school-to-work opportunities act in California. Economics of Education Review, 25(3), 315–326.

  33. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014). PISA 2012 Results: What students know and can do. Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Vol. 1). Available at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2012-results-what-students-know-and-can-do-volume-i_9789264201118-en. Accessed 16 Feb 2019

  34. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049–1079.

  35. Raghavan, K., Sartoris, M. L., & Glaser, R. (1998). Why does it go up? The impact of the MARS curriculum as revealed through changes in student explanations of a helium balloon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 547–567.

  36. Renninger, K. A., & Su, S. (2012). Interest and its development. In R. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 167–187). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  37. Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walwerg-Heriksson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Rocard report: “Science Education Now: A New Pedagogy for the Future of Europe”. Available at: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/docs/rapportrocardfinal.pdf. Accessed 12 Feb 2019

  38. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.

  39. Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96, 411–427.

  40. Sasson, I. (2019). Participation in research apprenticeship program: Issues related to career choice in STEM. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(3), 467–482.

  41. Selçuk, G. S., Sahin, M., & Açıkgöz, K. Ü. (2011). The effects of learning strategy instruction on achievement, attitude, and achievement motivation in a physics course. Research in Science Education, 41, 39–62.

  42. Shapiro, C. A., & Sax, L. J. (2011). Major selection and persistence for women in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 152, 5–18.

  43. Sjaastad, J. (2012). Sources of inspiration: The role of significant persons in young people’s choices of science in higher education. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 1615–1636.

  44. Snir, J., & Smith, C. (1995). Constructing understanding in the science classroom: Integrating laboratory experiments, student and computer models, and class discussion in learning scientific concepts. In D. N. Perkins, J. L. Schwartz, M. M. West, & M. S. Wiske (Eds.), Software goes to school: Teaching for understanding with new technologies (pp. 233–254). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  45. Staff, J., Messersmith, E. E., & Steinberg, L. (2009). Adolescents in the world of work. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 270–313). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

  46. Tai, R. T., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. T. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312(5777), 1143–1144.

  47. Taskinen, P. H., Schütte, K., & Prenzel, M. (2013). Adolescents’ motivation to select an academic science-related career: The role of school factors, individual interest, and science self-concept. Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice, 19, 717–733.

  48. Toh, K. A., & Goh, N. K. (2003). Reform in science and technology curricula. In J. P. Keeves & R. Watanabe (Eds.), International handbook of educational research in the Asia-Pacific region (pp. 1243–1256). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  49. Trumper, R. (2006). Factors affecting junior high school students’ interest in physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15, 47–58.

  50. Tyson, W., Lee, R., Borman, K. M., & Hanson, M. A. (2007). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pathways: High school science and math coursework and postsecondary degree attainment. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12, 243–270.

  51. Wang, X. (2013). Why students choose STEM majors: Motivation, high school learning, and postsecondary context of support. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 1080–1121.

  52. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82–91.

Download references


This study was funded by the Milgrom Foundation, University of Chicago.

Author information

Correspondence to Irit Sasson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sasson, I. Becoming a Scientist—Career Choice Characteristics. Int J of Sci and Math Educ (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10059-9

Download citation


  • Career choice
  • Self-efficacy
  • Social cognitive career theory
  • STEM career