Physics Identity Promotes Alternative Careers for First-Generation College Students in Engineering

This research study explored first-generation college students’ in engineering post-graduation career intentions based on responses to a quantitative survey. In this paper, we answer the following research questions: 1) How do first-generation college students’ measures of physics, mathematics, and engineering identity constructs differ compared to non-first-generation college students? and 2) How does a physics identity influence first-generation college student’s choice of an engineering major and career aspirations? The data came from the Intersectionality of Nonnormative Identities in the Cultures of Engineering (InIce) survey. InIce was completed by 2,916 first-year engineering college students enrolled in four institutions across the United States—72% non-first-generation college students, 20% first-generation college students, and 8% non-reporting students. The survey measured attitudinal profiles of belongingness in engineering, identity constructs (i.e., engineering, physics, and mathematics), affective measures, and demographic information. Previous studies quantitatively and qualitatively measured and validated the constructs that make up math identity, physics identity and engineering identity (i.e., interest in the subject, recognition by others, and beliefs about one’s performance/competence) for predicting engineering choice. To answer the first research question, a Welch’s t-test was used to compare the averages of firstgeneration college students and non-first-generation college students on overall measures of mathematics, physics, and engineering identity as well as the constructs of interest, recognition, and performance/competence in each subject area. This t-test was selected because it corrects unequal variance within the two populations. To answer the second research question, we used multiple linear regression to predict the choices of STEM and non-stem majors using measures of identity, affective factors, and first-generation college student status. Results from the first analysis demonstrate that first-generation college students entered engineering with a high sense of engineering identity, particularly in the performance/competence and interest constructs. Regression results showed that first-generation college students’ physics identity positively predicted choice of a non-STEM career; that is, first-generation college students with high physics identity were more interested in non-STEM careers (e.g., non-profit/non-government organization and medicine/health). This work highlights that first-generation college students may have different career pathway intentions and motivations in studying engineering during college. Introduction and Motivation Engineering culture shapes who students become. The culture of engineering ... “is not simply training in a prescribed set of appropriate, academic courses, but is enculturation into a wellestablished system of practices, meanings, and beliefs” (p. 218). Engineering is a community of practice where students aspiring to become members must acquire the cultural norms, values, and behaviors appropriate for this community. Such norms may encompass a students’ knowing what it takes to act and be recognized as a competent member of the community. Competence is one aspect of enculturating within a community of practice. Students’ enculturation into the engineering community of practice requires that educators understand how students associate with, withdraw from, and/or negotiate the cultural norms of this community. Once in an engineering community of practice, students begin to form their identities as engineers. These identities are “important outcomes of participation in communities of practice” (p. 57). “Identity construction is the process of thinking about oneself as an engineer, performing an engineer self, and ultimately being thought of as an engineer” (p. 273-274, italics in original). Additionally, identity is shaped by context and is, thus, intimately tied to learning within the engineering classroom. Participation in an engineering community of practice not only supports the development of students’ identity, it also means that students are not entirely free to develop any type of engineering identity, rather they are guided by “larger and more pervasive meanings of [engineering] identity derived from sociohistorical legacies of [engineering]; and historical and political meanings of being” an underrepresented student (p. 1192). It is equally important to know who students are expected to be, that is, how are traditional engineering practices are emphasizing a certain way of being that may promote particular career pathways differentially for diverse students. Identity development has important practical outcomes including academic and personal development, retention, and professional formation. In this paper, we examine another student outcome, career pathways. Research shows that women and students of color choose an engineering industry career after college less of then than their peers. However, little is known about how first-generation college students (FGCS) compare to their peers on career outcomes and how these outcomes might be affected by the ways in which FGCS see themselves as the kind of people who engage in particular STEM subjects. Our research examines these relationships to understand affective attributes that might be developed in undergraduate engineering education to promote more diverse engineers entering industrial jobs and highlight needs for the engineering context to support students in STEM identity development. First-Generation College Students First-generation college students (FGCS) are defined as a college student who comes from a family where neither parents have had a college or post-secondary experience, while a non-firstgeneration college student (non-FGCS) is defined as a student who reported at least one of their parents completing some post-secondary education. The classification of FGCS in the studies are consistent in that they are not relegated to racial/ethnic minorities. Studies do not explicitly affirm FGCS are of a certain racial/ethnic minority, rather studies suggest that they are “more likely to be” African-American and/or Latino/a. Evidence suggesting a disproportionate amount of FGCS come from underrepresented groups is further articulated in the report First in My Family (p. 6). First-generation college students have multiple intersecting identities i.e., race/ethnicity, LGBTQ+, low-socioeconomic status, and disability status to name a few, that are less privileged in an engineering context. The purpose of recognizing the intersectional identities of FGCS is to draw awareness to the complexities of this population and to acknowledge that our analysis only points to one aspect of students’ social identity. We have explored intersectional identities of first-generation college students in a previous study. In this paper, we do not unpack the multiple intersections of students’ social identities due to a small sample size of FGCS. Literature on career aspirations of FGCS’ and STEM identities is scant. Studies on FGCS often focus on postsecondary success and access, mostly taking a deficit approach by pointing out poor academic preparation, negative experiences, limited support, and barriers towards their future careers. Our prior work began to highlight FGCS’ career aspirations, while not yet focusing on STEM identities. Using data from a study of over 50 different 2and 4-year colleges across the U.S. of students enrolled in first-year English courses, results demonstrated that on average FGCS, had a greater interest in engineering careers, a career as a math/science teacher, and a greater interest in a career in physics. Additionally, when asked about expectations for their future career, FGCS reported a higher level of interests in supervising others, inventing/designing things, developing new knowledge and skills, doing hands-on work, and applying math and science, than their non-FGCS peers. This study was a first step towards building a profile of FGCS, specifically those in engineering, outside the deficit base narrative that has dominated the literature. Similarly, other literature of first-generation college students, while not specific to engineering, found that FGCS reported similar degree aspirations as their non-FGCS peers, that is, bachelor’s degree through doctoral or professional degree). While the study reported significant levels of barriers for FGCS, it is worth emphasizing that despite the academic and social barriers reported in the study, FGCS career aspirations were not deterred. We acknowledge that FGCS face many barriers towards achieving a higher education. In this paper, we decided to center our investigations on students’ perceptions of themselves, their identities, with the goal of finding leverage points to empower FGCS toward careers in engineering. It is equally important to understand FGCS’ perceptions of themselves as someone that could be or do a particular STEM-subject, as it is to understand barriers to access and success. This study takes the former approach as we seek to provide a narrative about FGCS that is often overlooked or untold. We focused on how FGCS identified themselves rather than allowing the school systems to define them through non-personal measures (i.e., GPA, SAT/ACT scores, or years to degree completion). Theoretical Framework In this study, we used instruments with strong validity evidence to measure students’ physics, mathematics, and engineering identities. These items were developed from a rich background of identities studies, mostly qualitative, and theoretical sources. In this section, we will describe how constructs of physics, mathematics, and engineering identity were developed. Our definition of identity, what it means to be an engineer, comes from Gee, who pushed for identity research in the education space, coining id