Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jan 16.
Published in final edited form as: Curr Issues Educ (Tempe). 2013;16(2):1179.

Predictors of intent to pursue a college health science education among high achieving minority 10th graders

Katarzyna A Zebrak 1, Daisy Le 1, Bradley O Boekeloo 1, Min Qi Wang 1
PMCID: PMC4296255  NIHMSID: NIHMS636703  PMID: 25598654

Abstract

Minority populations are underrepresented in fields of science, perhaps limiting scientific perspectives. Informed by recent studies using Social Cognitive Career Theory, this study examined whether three conceptual constructs: self-efficacy, perceived adult support, and perceptions of barriers, as well as several discrete and immutable variables, were associated with intent to pursue college science education in a sample (N = 134) of minority youth (70.1% female and 67.2% African American). A paper-and-pencil survey about pursuit of college science was administered to 10th graders with a B- or better grade point average from six high schools in an underserved community. Results indicated that the three conceptual constructs were bivariate correlates of intent to pursue college science education. Only perceived adult support and knowing whether a parent received college education were significant predictors in multivariate modeling. These results build on previous research and provide further insight into youth decision-making regarding pursuit of college science.

Keywords: minority, youth, self-efficacy, adult support, college education, science

Underrepresentation of minority groups in science fields

The population of the United States is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse, yet professionals in fields of science do not reflect the same level of diversity. Such a lack of scientists from diverse backgrounds may limit science and its applications. Minority physicians, and most likely other minority science-related professionals, are more likely to serve minority populations (Institute of Medicine, 2003). Currently, minorities make up approximately 33% of the population (U.S. Census, 2008). Of note, 17% of African American, 11% of Latino, and 12% of Native American adults aged 25 and older earn a college degree, compared with 28% of White, non-Latino adults (Babco, 2005; U.S. Census, 2000). Ethnic minorities constitute about 33% of the population; however, less than 15% of most health profession positions are filled by ethnic minority members (Balogun, 2005). African Americans make up 14% of the U.S. population, but they make up only 6% of physicians, 10% of registered nurses, 3% of dentists (U.S. Bureau of Labor, 2005; Library Index, 2012). Furthermore, African Americans make up 4% of biological scientists, 8% of medical scientists, 4% of environmental scientists, 7% of psychologists, and less than 1% of sociologists (U.S. Census, 2008; U.S. Bureau of Labor, 2005; Library Index, 2012).

Minority youth and pursuit of college science education

The underrepresentation of minorities in science-related careers may be caused by lack of access to accredited programs, lack of exposure to career opportunities, an inadequate pool of role models with whom they can identify and who can serve as mentors, poor performance of minority students on standardized tests, and poor preparation of minority students in mathematics, reading, and science (Healthy People 2020). Young minority students are a source from which potential future scientists and related professionals can be found. However, interest in science is often not nurtured and these students turn to more traditional options for future careers including education and law enforcement (Bologun, 2005). Science programs targeting high school students may increase the number of scientists since students' interest in the sciences may start to develop during this time in their adolescence (Winkleby, 2007). Programs may encourage students to make the necessary preparations, such as taking appropriate courses, for acceptance into college science programs during their high school years (Cohen, 2006).

Self-efficacy, perceived barriers, perceived adult support, and demographic/immutable characteristics in the Social Cognitive Theory framework

Theories that focus on the relationship between cognitive and contextual factors and career development are limited. However, one such theory is the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), which incorporates Albert Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory principle of triadic, reciprocal causation of human behavior (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2000). The central concept and assumption behind SCCT is that human behavior is in large part the result of person-environment interaction that is dynamic and situation specific (Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2000). In this theory, personal attributes, environmental factors, and overt behavior affect one another bi-directionally. In essence, people are products and producers of their environments (Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2000).

Self-efficacy is one of the central constructs of SCCT and has been studied extensively (Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2003). Self-efficacy is defined as one's personal cognitive evaluation of ability to execute a particular behavior (Bandura, 1986). In the context of SCCT, this perception is considered a cognitive personal attribute (Lent et al., 2000). Findings have shown strong predictive relationships of self-efficacy with education and career pursuits (Ali & McWhirter, 2006; Fouad & Smith, 1996; Kerpelman & Mosher, 2004; Kerpelman, Eryigit, & Stephens, 2008). As much of the previous research using SCCT has focused on examining personal attribute components of SCCT, particularly self-efficacy, less is known about the roles of contextual or environmental factors in the theory (Lent et al., 2000).

Perceived supports and barriers can be considered perceived aspects of the environment, or objective environmental factors that are subjectively construed by the individuals (Lent et al., 2000). Such contextual influences are theorized to exert a degree of influence on educational and career goals (Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2000; Lent et al., 2003). The relative importance of perceived supports and barriers has been re-examined on several occasions as SCCT underwent refinement with emerging research evidence (Lent et al., 2000; Lent et al., 2003). However, research that includes aspects of the environment, such as perceived environmental supports and barriers, along with self-efficacy in SCCT models is relatively underdeveloped and lacks clear results (Lent et al., 2000). Thus, more research is needed to clarify their role in predicting academic and career goals.

Aside from the aforementioned constructs, SCCT also highlights the importance of more distant background factors such as person inputs (e.g., predispositions, gender, race/ethnicity, disability and health status), and background contextual affordances (e.g., opportunities, emotional and financial support, and cultural and gender role socialization) (Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2000). In the SCCT framework, demographic and immutable characteristics potentially relevant to college science pursuit by minority youth, such as youth's gender and birth/immigration status, could be viewed as person inputs, while parents' birth/immigration status and parental education could be considered background contextual affordances. Person inputs and background contextual affordances are hypothesized to have an indirect influence on educational and career goals, through other more proximal measures (Lent et al., 1994; Lent et al., 2000). However, several extant sources suggest that gender (Kerpelman et al., 2008; Trusty, Robinson, Plata, & Ng, 2000), parental education (Kerpelman & Mosher, 2004; Lambert, Zeman, Allen, & Bussière, 2004; McWhirter, Torres, Salgado, & Valdez, 2007), and immigration status (Baum & Flores, 2011; Erisman & Looney, 2007; Fuligni, 2006) may have a more direct link to educational outcomes. Thus, it may be especially important to elucidate the relative importance of these covariates in the context of educational plans related to health science education, and to adjust for their effect when examining the contribution of self-efficacy, perceived barriers, and perceived adult support to pursuit of a college science education.

The current study

As few theories have been examined to help explain underserved youths' decision-making about college science and related education and career choice, the overall goal of this study is to further examine SCCT in this regard. Specifically, this study will examine whether the three conceptual constructs, self-efficacy (a cognitive personal attribute), perceived adult support (a perceived environmental factor), and perceptions of barriers (a perceived environmental factor) independently or jointly predict pursuit of college science education among an underprivileged, academically high achieving 10th grade population. These conceptual constructs will be examined as independent variables along with several discrete and immutable demographic variables, namely youth's gender and birth/immigration status, as well as parents' birth/immigration status and education. Based on past studies of SCCT, we hypothesize that self-efficacy will remain a predictor of intent to pursue a college science education after controlling for all other study variables. Findings will elucidate the centrality of self-efficacy, and the relative contribution of SCCT-defined environmental factors, person variables, and background contextual affordances in this application of the theory.

Methods

Background

This analysis utilized baseline data collected as a part of a larger study, Climbing Up & Reaching Back (CURB). CURB was a three-year project designed to identify predictors of pursuit of health science careers and test educational materials and face-to-face mentoring interventions to increase interest in health science careers among underprivileged minority high school students living in Prince George's County, Maryland. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained for this research.

Recruitment and data collection

High schools in the “inner National Capital beltway” Prince George's County area (located in Prince George's County on or between the beltway, a major highway, and the Washington, D.C. jurisdictional border) were selected for the study. This area had high minority race/ethnicity composition and a relatively poor socioeconomic profile. Six of the eight schools participated, with two schools declining participation due to other current priority projects occurring at the school. To participate in CURB, students had to be enrolled in the 10th grade at one of the participating high schools and have a cumulative grade point average of B– or higher as of November, 2009. Further, only students without developmental disabilities requiring special classroom teaching assistance were eligible for participation.

Participating school principals and assigned administrative staff received lists of eligible students based on current school system records. If a student met the necessary requirements, designated staff members who had already signed study protocol agreements, privately approached each eligible student, provided a detailed explanation of the consent and enrollment process, and provided consent materials.

All students who provided a signed assent form and a parent-signed consent form by initiation of the study were eligible for CURB (n=167). Eligible students were then offered the CURB paper-and-pencil baseline survey at the beginning of a study initiation session. The study initiation session was held at the researcher's university, to which all student participants were bused from their respective high schools. The university was in the same inner beltway area as the high schools. Students who did not attend this session were allowed to come to the university study office after the initiation session to complete the survey. All survey participants received $10 as an incentive. In total, 134 students completed the baseline survey, which provides the data being analyzed in this study.

Survey development

The baseline survey instrument was designed by a team of researchers including behavioral scientists, university students, and community members, using existing items whenever possible. New items were also developed for the survey. The survey was pretested with high school students not involved in the study to assess student ease of completion, comprehension, and acceptability. Several revisions and a second round of review and pretesting were conducted before the survey was administered for this study.

Measures

Self-efficacy to overcome barriers to enrollment in college health science

Self-efficacy was measured using a 5-item scale created by the researchers. Once administered, this measure was assessed for reliability which was found to be adequate (α = 0.75). Students were asked about their level of agreement (1 - strongly disagree to 7 - strongly agree) with the following statements: “I can always find a way to pay for college”, “I can earn good enough grades to be accepted into college health science”, “I'm sure I can do a good job at completing college applications”, “I can get a high enough SAT score to be accepted into college”, and “I can take the right high school science courses to get into college”. To obtain the multi-item scale score, the mean value across items was calculated for each participant. The scale scores were interpreted as: The higher the average scale score, the higher the participant's self-efficacy. The range for the scores was 4.60. The mean score for self-efficacy scale was 5.86 (SD = 0.94). The median score was 6.00.

Perceived adult support

This measure was obtained using a 4-item scale created by the researchers. Once administered, this measure was assessed for reliability which was found to be adequate (α = 0.71). Students were asked about their level of agreement (1 - strongly disagree to 7 - strongly agree) with the following statements: “I know adults who encourage me often”, “I know adults who encourage me often in sciences”, “Most of the adults I know are good role models for me”, and “I have good adult science role models”. To obtain the multi-item score, the mean value across items was calculated for each participant. The scale scores were interpreted as: The higher the average scale score, the higher the participant's perceived adult support. The range for the scores was 5.75. The mean score for perceived adult support scale was 5.66 (SD = 1.12). The median score was 5.75.

Perceived barriers to enrollment in college health science

Perceived barriers were measured using a 5-item scale created by the researchers. Once administered, this measure was assessed for reliability which was found to be adequate (α = 0.73). Students were asked about their level of agreement (1 - strongly disagree to 7 - strongly agree) with the following statements: “College tuition is very expensive”, “Good grades are necessary to be accepted into college health science”, “The college application process is very complex and meticulous”, “High SAT scores are necessary when applying to college”, “You have to take the right high school science courses to get into college health science programs”. To obtain the multi-item scale score, the mean value was calculated across items for each participant. The scale scores were interpreted as: The higher the average scale score, the higher the participant's perceived barriers. The range for the scores was 3.80. The mean score for perceived barriers scale was 6.11 (SD = 0.78). The median score was 6.20.

Plan to pursue Bachelor's degree in a science-related field

This variable was a single-score item (I now plan to pursue Bachelor's degree in a science-related field). Students were asked about their level of agreement (1 - strongly disagree to 7 - strongly agree). The variable was interpreted as: The higher the item score, the higher the participant's intent to pursue college science education. The range for the scores was 6.00. The mean score for the single-score item of plan to pursue Bachelor's degree in a science-related field was 5.04 (SD = 1.86). The median score was 6.00.

Selected demographic and immutable variables

The demographic variables were measured and coded as follows: Gender (male=0; female=1), parents' place of birth (outside the United States=0; within the United States=1), respondent's place of birth (outside the United States=0; within the United States=1), knowing father's education level does not include college (don't know education level=0; know educational level is less than college (including trade school and/or high school or less)=1, knowing father's education level includes college (don't know educational level=0; know educational level is college or higher (including at least an Associate's degree)=1, knowing mother's educational level is less than college (don't know education level=0, know educational level is less than college (including trade school and/or high school or less)=1; knowing mother's educational level is college or higher (Don't know educational level=0, know educational level is college or higher including at least an Associate's degree)=1).

Because the “I don't know” category for both the father's and mother's educational levels included a substantial percentage of responses, we believed that labeling this category as missing and excluding and/or imputing the missing values could have resulted in potential bias by erroneously assuming missingness at random, and possibly masking diverse reasons behind the respondents' choice of this category.

Analytic Plan

All data were double entered for data entry reliability into Microsoft Excel and converted to PASW (SPSS) for analysis. Discrepant entries were checked against the hard-copy survey before creating the final data set. Because the total number of missing values for our variables was 4 across all study variables, we did not employ any imputation techniques to replace the missing values. All analyses were completed using PASW 17.0. Simple linear regression was used to investigate bivariate relationships between each conceptual independent variable of interest and the dependent variable. Next, hierarchical multiple regression with block entry was used to investigate the multivariate relationships between the predictors and the dependent variable. The first block entry into the regression model was all of the discrete, immutable demographic variables to determine whether any of these variables provided a significant context for the relationship of the conceptual independent variables with pursuit of college science education. The second block entry included self-efficacy with the demographic variables to confirm past research showing that this variable predicts educational and career pursuits. The third and final block included all of the study independent variables in the model to determine which independently predict pursuit of college science education while controlling for all other variables, and to determine the overall explanatory value based on the model explained variance (R2). Variables were added in each into each block using the Enter method.

Results

The majority of participants were female (62.7%) and born in the United States (67.2%) (Table 1). Additionally, the majority of respondents' parents were born outside of the United States (64.7%). When asked about the educational level of their fathers or male guardians, 32.8% of the participants knew their father or male guardian had less than college level of education, 26.1% knew their father or male guardian had earned at least Associate's degree, and 41.0% did not know the highest paternal level of education. In regard to their mothers, 37.6% knew their mother or female guardian had less than college level of education, 33.1% knew their mother or female guardian had earned at least Associate's degree, and 29.3% did not know the highest maternal level of education.

TABLE 1. Characteristics of the study sample.

Frequency (%) Total
Gender
 Male 40 (29.9%) 134 (100%)
 Female 94 (70.1%)
Place of birth (both parents)
 Outside of the United States 86 (64.7%) 133 (100%)
 Within the United States 47 (35.3%)
Place of birth (participant)
 Outside of the Unites States 44 (32.8%) 134 (100%)
 Within the United States 90 (67.2%)
Father's or male guardian's education level
 Less than college (incl. trade school and/or ≤ HS) 44 (32.8%) 134 (100%)
 College or higher (at least an Associate's degree) 35 (26.1%)
 I don't know 55 (41.0%)
Mother's education or female guardian's
 Less than college (incl. trade school and/or < HS) 50 (37.6%) 133 (100%)
 College or higher (at least an Associate's degree) 44 (33.1%)
 I don't know 39 (29.3%)
Open in a new tab

The bivariate results (Table 2) indicate increasing self-efficacy to overcome barriers to enrollment in college health science is correlated with increasing intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field (b = 0.48, p < 0.05). Increasing perceived adult support is correlated with increasing intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field (b = 0.82, p < 0.001). In addition, increasing perceived barriers to enrollment in college health science is correlated with increasing intent to pursue college science education (b = 0.65, p < 0.01).

TABLE 2. Results of bivariate analyses (N = 132 for each analysis).

B SE B t β
Self-efficacy 0.48 0.17 2.82 .24**
Perceived adult support 0.82 0.13 6.50 .50***
Perceived barriers 0.65 0.20 3.20 .27**
Open in a new tab
**

p < 0.01,

***

p < 0.001

Note: Self-efficacy R2 = 0.05; Perceived adult support R2 = 0.24; Perceived barriers R2 = 0.07

The results of the hierarchical regression are presented in Table 3.

TABLE 3. Summary of hierarchical multiple regression predicting “current plan to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science” (N = 130).

BLOCK 1 BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3
B SE B β B SE B β B SE B β
Gender 0.05 0.34 .01 -0.08 0.33 -.02 -0.05 0.30 -.01
Birth status (both parents) - 0.07 0.37 - .02 -0.16 0.36 -.04 -0.14 0.32 -.04
Birth status (participant) - 0.80 0.37 -.20* -0.82 0.36 -.21* -0.55 0.33 -.14
Father's educ. levela 1.68 0.42 .42*** 1.68 0.40 .43*** 1.29 0.37 .33**
Father's educ. levelb 1.22 0.48 .28* 1.05 0.46 .24* 0.70 0.43 .16
Mother's educ. levela - 1.44 0.45 -.38** -1.44 0.44 -.38** -1.44 0.40 -.38***
Mother's educ. levelb - 0.76 0.50 -.19 -0.72 0.48 -.18 -0.64 0.44 -.16
Self-efficacy .52 .16 .26** 0.16 0.16 .08
Perceived adult support 0.65 0.14 .39***
Perceived barriers 0.26 0.19 .11
Adjusted R2 0.14 0.20 0.34
R2 change 0.19 0.06 0.14
F statistic for R2 change 4.04** 10.24** 13.61***
Open in a new tab
a

< College vs. Not known,

b

≥ College vs. Not known

*

p < .05,

**

p < .01,

***

p < .001

In block 1 several of the demographic and immutable characteristics are significantly associated with a plan to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science. Specifically, being born within the U.S. is associated with lower intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science (b = -0.80, p < 0.05). Compared to not knowing father's educational level, knowing that father's education does not include college and knowing that father's education does include college are both associated with increased intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science (b = 1.68, p < 0.001, and b = 1.22, p < 0.05, respectively). In contrast, knowing that mother's education does not include college (compared to not knowing mother's educational level) is related to decreased intent to pursue college health science (b = -1.44, p < 0.01). In block 2, the added variable of self-efficacy to overcome barriers to enrollment in health science is positively associated with the intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in college health science (b = 0.52, p < 0.01). The relationships between participant's birth status, knowing whether father's education included college, knowing whether mother's education included college, and the intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science remain virtually unchanged from block 1. Upon addition of perceived adult support and perceived barriers in block 3, both self-efficacy and participant birth status are no longer significant predictors of intent to pursue a degree in college health science. However, increasing perceived adult support is related to increasing intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science (b = 0.65, p < 0.001). In addition, knowing that father's education does not include college (compared to not knowing father's educational status) is associated with increased intent to pursue a college degree in health science (b = 1.29, p < 0.01), while knowing that mother's education does not include college (compared to not knowing mother's educational status) is associated with decreased intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in health science (b = -1.44, p < 0.001). The final model (block 3) with all independent variables included explains approximately 34% of variance in the dependent variable (current plan to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field) (adjusted R2 = 0.34).

Discussion

Based on past research on the SCCT, we hypothesized that after controlling for other variables in the model, self-efficacy to overcome barriers to enrollment in college health science would predict intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field in a sample of high achieving minority 10th graders from an underserved area. Nevertheless, we found that this cognitive personal attribute was no longer significant when various other personal attributes and environmental or contextual variables were included in the prediction model of intent to pursue college science education. In our multivariate model including all study variables, we found that perceived adult support and knowing that the educational level of both one's mother and father included college were predictors in the model. In regard to our theoretical SCCT framework for the study, these findings suggest that adults/parents may serve as important environmental influences on 10th graders' interest in college science education while other variables, including personal attributes, do not appear as influential.

Perceived adult support in the context of pursuit of college science

Perceived adult support was a significant predictor of a plan to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field when controlling for all other variables (cognitive and personal attributes, as well as environmental factors) in the model. In one of their seminal articles on the SCCT, Lent et al. (2000) discussed the potential importance of perceived support to forming educational and carrier plans. They also mentioned a relative scarcity of studies investigating this contextual influence in relation to academic and career outcomes, and pointed out the need for further investigations. Our finding mirrors the findings of the few existing studies that have investigated perceived social support (e.g., from parents and teachers) and found it to be associated with academic, educational, and career outcomes (e.g., Flores & O'Brien, 2002; McWhirter, Hackett, & Bandalos, 1998; Kenny, Blustein, Chaves, Grossman, & Gallagher, 2003; Schaefers, Epperson, & Nauta, 1997). Evaluations of mentoring programs suggest that the availability of support-providing adult mentor figures is an important factor in social, emotional and behavioral development and functioning of youth, particularly in disadvantaged or at-risk circumstances (Jakielek, Moor, & Hair, 2002). For example, having a mentor as a source of support has been linked to higher academic achievement and first-year college attendance rates immediately after high school completion (Johnson, 1997; Thompson & Kelly-Vance, 2001). However, researchers point out that it is not merely the presence, but also the quality of supportive relationships with adult figures providing mentorship that may be of particular importance in relation to positive outcomes (DuBois, Neville, Parra, & Pugh-Lilly, 2002; Rhodes, 2008). The results of our study with regard to perceived adult support suggest that parents and other role models may be especially relevant to formation of immediate educational plans. As such, the concept of perceived adult support could be an important measure to collect and target in interventions aiming to influence the educational and career choices of high-achieving underprivileged youth.

Self-efficacy to overcome barriers to pursuit of college science

While self-efficacy was related to intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field in bivariate analysis, the variable was not a predictor in the final multivariate model that included the constructs perceived adult support and college barriers. The lack of significant predictive power of self-efficacy in the context of these two other constructs was a surprising finding given its importance in the SCCT (Lent et al., 1994; Lent & Brown, 1996). Others who have investigated the relationship of career/educational self-efficacy and various educational and career outcomes and found strong associations between the two measures (Ali & McWhirter, 2006; Fouad & Smith, 1996; Kerpelman et al., 2008; Kerpelman & Mosher 2004).

One reason for the finding of non-significance of self-efficacy as a hypothesized predictor of educational plan could be the limitation in statistical power due to a fairly small sample size. In addition, the sample of students used in the current study is uniquely homogeneous. Specifically, students were selected for inclusion in the study based on meeting high-achievement criteria (a B- average or better on the most recent high school transcript). A number of previous investigations into the association between self-efficacy and career and educational plans did not select youth based on achievement criteria, thus potentially collecting self-efficacy measures from youth of mixed (low and high) achievement levels (e.g., Ali & McWhirter, 2006; Kerpelman & Mosher, 2004; Kerpelman et al., 2008). In addition, our outcome variable did not measure general college enrollment plans, but a very specific plan to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field. It is possible that specificity of the outcome measure may also have contributed to the non-significance of self-efficacy when compared directly with perceived adult support. Furthermore, even though the geographical area from which the sample originated has relatively lower socioeconomic indicators than surrounding areas, the surrounding areas include affluent suburbs, the seat of the federal government, and numerous higher education institutions (including historically African American institutions). Thus, individual self-efficacy among the economically disadvantaged youth residing in this area may not be as much of an influence as it might be in less resource-rich regions (e.g., Ali & McWhirter, 2006; Kerpelman & Mosher, 2004). It is worth noting, however, that even though self-efficacy was not a predictor when perceived adult support and perceived barriers were entered into the model, it was a predictor with various demographic variables but without these constructs on the model. Hence, the findings suggest that self-efficacy should remain a variable of interest in future investigations.

Perceived barriers to pursuit of college science

Controlling for all other variables in the model, the measure of perceived barriers was not a predictor of intent to pursue a Bachelor's degree in a science-related field. Lent et al. (2000) addressed the relevance of this contextual influence to educational and career outcomes in the context of SCCT. They pointed out that the measure of perceived barriers has been investigated in previous studies and yielded conflicting evidence with regard to prediction of educational and career outcomes. For example, while some researchers found significant associations between perceived barriers and educational and career outcomes (e.g., Ali & McWhirter, 2006; Kenny et al., 2003), the findings of other investigations have not supported the presence of such associations (e.g., McWhirter et al., 1998; McWhirter et al., 2007). Perhaps some of the potential explanations provided above for non-significance of self-efficacy also apply to this construct. Additionally, Lent et al. (2003) found that perceived barriers were not directly related to educational and career outcomes; instead the relationship between perceived barriers and educational pursuits was mediated by self-efficacy. It is possible that the relationship between perceived barriers and intent to pursue college science education is mediated by another variable not examined here.

Limitations and future directions

This study has several potential limitations. The study sample was not randomly selected, thus limiting the generalizability of our findings. Only selected constructs of the SCCT theory, for which data were available in this secondary analysis, were investigated. Examining the theory in its entirety, i.e., using the full set of constructs included in the SCCT, and estimating relationships among the variables with methods like structural equation modeling may have yielded different results. In addition, we were only able to investigate student-reported (perceived) adult support and perceptions of barriers, as opposed to elements of actual (objective) support and barrier structures existing in the environment.

Future studies could address some of the aforementioned limitations by investigating the sources, types, and frequency of both actual and perceived adult support as potentially important contextual measures that could be targeted by interventions with youth. The addition of other potential mediators and moderators, and examining the relationships among the SCCT construct longitudinally could greatly enhance future investigations and enable researchers to link educational plans with actual educational choices that follow. SCCT guided investigations could also examine the relationships among the important constructs in more diverse samples.

References

  1. Ali SR, McWhirter EH. Rural Appalachian youth's vocational/educational postsecondary aspirations: Applying social cognitive career theory. Journal of Career Development. 2006;33(2):87–111. [Google Scholar]
  2. Babco EL. The status of Native Americans in science and engineering. Washington, DC: Commission on professionals in science and technology; 2005. Retrieved from http://ehrweb.aaas.org/mge/Reports/Report1/Babco-StatusOfNativeAmericansInSandE.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  3. Balogun JA, Sloan PE, Hardney K. Health professions career awareness program for seventh- and eighth-grade African-American students. Journal of Allied Health. 2005;34:236–243. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cohen JJ. The future of the health professions pipeline: A new call to action. Academic Medicine. 2006;81(Suppl. 6):S60–S61. doi: 10.1097/01.ACM.0000225245.38638.44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice Hall; 1986. [Google Scholar]
  6. Baum S, Flores SM. Higher education and children in immigrant families. The Future Of Children. 2011;21(1):171–193. doi: 10.1353/foc.2011.0000. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. DuBois DL, Neville HA, Parra GR, Pugh-Lilly AO. Testing a new model of mentoring. New Directions for Youth Development. 2002;93:21–57. doi: 10.1002/yd.23320029305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Erisman W, Looney S. Opening the door to the American Dream: Increasing higher education access and success for immigrants. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy; 2007. Apr, [Google Scholar]
  9. Flores LY, O'Brien KM. The career development of Mexican American adolescent women: A test of the social cognitive career theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2002;49(1):14–27. [Google Scholar]
  10. Fouad NA, Smith PL. A test of a social cognitive model for middle school students: Math and science. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1996;43:338–346. [Google Scholar]
  11. Fuligni AJ. Family obligation among children in immigrant families. Migration Information Source. 2006 Jul; Retrieved from http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=410.
  12. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Unequal treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. 2003 Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=030908265X. [PubMed]
  13. Jakielek SM, Moore KA, Hair EC. Mentoring programs and youth development: A synthesis. Washington, DC: Edna McConnell Clark Foundation; 2002. Jan, [Google Scholar]
  14. Johnson AW. Mentoring at-risk youth: A research review and evaluation of the impacts of the Sponsor-A-Scholar program on student performance. (Doctoral dissertation) Dissertations available from ProQuest (AAI9727243) 1997 Jan 1; Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI9727243.
  15. Kenny ME, Blustein DL, Chaves A, Grossman JM, Gallagher L. The role of perceived barriers and relational support in the educational and vocational lives of urban high school students. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2003;50(2):142–155. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kerpelman JL, Eryigit S, Stephens CJ. African American adolescents' future education orientation: Associations with self-efficacy, ethnic identity, and perceived parental support. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2008;37(8):997–1008. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kerpelman JL, Mosher LS. Rural African American adolescents' future orientation: the importance of self-efficacy, control and responsibility, and identity development. An International Journal of Theory and Research. 2004;4(2):187–208. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lambert M, Zeman K, Allen M, Bussière . Who pursues postsecondary education, who leaves and why: Results from the Youth in Transition survey. Ottawa, CA: Minister of Industry; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lent RW, Brown SD. Social cognitive approach to career development: An overview. Career Development Quarterly. 1996;44:310–321. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lent RW, Brown SD, Hackett G. Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance [Monograph] Journal of Vocational Behavior. 1994;45:79–122. [Google Scholar]
  21. Lent RW, Brown SD, Hackett G. Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2000;47(1):36–49. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lent RW, Brown SD, Schmidt J, Brenner B, Lyons H, Treistman D. Relation of contextual supports and barriers to choice behavior in engineering majors: Test of alternative social cognitive models. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2003;50:458–465. [Google Scholar]
  23. Library Index. Minorities in the labor force – Occupations. 2012 Retrieved from http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2911/Minorities-in-Labor-Force-OCCUPATIONS.html.
  24. McWhirter EH, Hackett G, Bandalos DL. A causal model of the educational plans and career expectations of Mexican American high school girls. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1998;45(2):166–181. [Google Scholar]
  25. McWhirter EH, Torres DM, Salgado S, Valdez M. Perceived barriers and postsecondary plans in Mexican American and White adolescents. Journal of Career Assessment. 2007;15:119–138. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rhodes JE. Improving youth mentoring interventions through research-based practice. American Journal of Community Psychology. 2008;41:35–42. doi: 10.1007/s10464-007-9153-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Schaefers KG, Epperson DL, Nauta MM. Women's career development: can theoretically derived variables predict persistence in engineering majors? Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1997;44(2):173–187. [Google Scholar]
  28. Thompson LA, Kelly-Vance L. The impact of mentoring on academic achievement of at-risk youth. Children and Youth Services Review. 2001;23(3):227–242. [Google Scholar]
  29. Trusty J, Robinson CR, Plata M, Ng KM. Effects of gender, socioeconomic status, and early academic performance on postsecondary educational choice. Journal of Counseling & Development. 2000;78(4):463–472. [Google Scholar]
  30. U.S. Bureau of Labor. (Bureau of Labor Statistics): Employment by occupation, 2004 and projected 2014. Washington, DC: 2005. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ [Google Scholar]
  31. U.S. Census Bureau. An older and more diverse nation by midcentury. Washington, DC: 2008. Aug 14, Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb08-123.html. [Google Scholar]
  32. U.S. Census Bureau. Census bureau facts for features, CB00-FF 13. 2000 Oct 23; Retrieved from http://www.census.gov.
  33. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Healthy People 2020. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2012. Sep 21, Retrieved from http://www.healthypeople.gov/document/tableofcontents.htm. [Google Scholar]
  34. Winkleby MA. The Stanford medical youth science program: 18 years of a biomedical program for low-income high school students. Academic Medicine. 2007;82:139–145. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31802d8de6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES