TY - CONF

T1 - Why students choose (not) to study engineering

AU - Holmegaard, Henriette Tolstrup

AU - Ulriksen, Lars

AU - Møller Madsen, Lene

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - This paper presents results from a longitudinal study in which 134 students are followed in their transition process from the end of upper secondary school to university. Through interviews with 38 students, this research aims at understanding for what reasons students choose a Higher Education in science, technology, engineering or math (STM), but also why some students with an interest in STM in upper secondary school end up by not choosing it. Using a narrative psychological approach, we conclude that students, who choose not to study STM, are not only choosing what to study on behalf of their interest. More students do actually have an interest in STM, but STM is being considered as not supporting students self development. The skills and competences you get by studying STM is understood as being something separated from the rest of the world, and STM is understood as being stable, rigid and locked without it being possible to develop or discuss. To put it in another way the students do not see many opportunities for constructing attractive identities if choosing STM. On the contrary students, who do choose engineering, do it because of aspirations towards cross-disciplinary project based working methods, an innovative study programme with possibilities to engage in real life problems and also interesting job perspectives. The research find, that the students who enters engineering find it difficult to see any coherence across the study-subjects, and they do only to a limited extend find that the teaching include real life problems in the first semester studying engineering. The conclusion is that engineering to a large extend matches the expectations of those who do not choose engineering. If we want to attract and keep more students in engineering, engineering institutions could hugely benefit from considering educational strategies that actually match the expectations of students who do choose engineering, namely programs which are more cross disciplinary and innovative, also (and especially) in the first year. These implications are discussed in the conclusion.

AB - This paper presents results from a longitudinal study in which 134 students are followed in their transition process from the end of upper secondary school to university. Through interviews with 38 students, this research aims at understanding for what reasons students choose a Higher Education in science, technology, engineering or math (STM), but also why some students with an interest in STM in upper secondary school end up by not choosing it. Using a narrative psychological approach, we conclude that students, who choose not to study STM, are not only choosing what to study on behalf of their interest. More students do actually have an interest in STM, but STM is being considered as not supporting students self development. The skills and competences you get by studying STM is understood as being something separated from the rest of the world, and STM is understood as being stable, rigid and locked without it being possible to develop or discuss. To put it in another way the students do not see many opportunities for constructing attractive identities if choosing STM. On the contrary students, who do choose engineering, do it because of aspirations towards cross-disciplinary project based working methods, an innovative study programme with possibilities to engage in real life problems and also interesting job perspectives. The research find, that the students who enters engineering find it difficult to see any coherence across the study-subjects, and they do only to a limited extend find that the teaching include real life problems in the first semester studying engineering. The conclusion is that engineering to a large extend matches the expectations of those who do not choose engineering. If we want to attract and keep more students in engineering, engineering institutions could hugely benefit from considering educational strategies that actually match the expectations of students who do choose engineering, namely programs which are more cross disciplinary and innovative, also (and especially) in the first year. These implications are discussed in the conclusion.

KW - Engineering education

KW - First year experiences

KW - Retention

KW - Student's choice of engineering

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938723083&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Paper

AN - SCOPUS:84938723083

T2 - Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010

Y2 - 19 September 2010 through 22 September 2010

ER -