School students’ aspirations for STEM careers: the influence of self-concept, parental expectations, career outcome expectations, and perceptions of STEM professionals

Full text

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cape20
Asia Pacific Journal of Education
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/cape20
School students’ aspirations for STEM careers: the
influence of self-concept, parental expectations,
career outcome expectations, and perceptions of
STEM professionals
Chaoqun Lu, Winnie Wing Mui So, Yu Chen, Antuni Wiyarsi, Wing Kai
Stephen Chiu, Yeonjoo Ko, Ying-Shao Hsu, Hyunju Lee, Aik Ling Tan & Siew
Wei Tho
To cite this article: Chaoqun Lu, Winnie Wing Mui So, Yu Chen, Antuni Wiyarsi, Wing Kai
Stephen Chiu, Yeonjoo Ko, Ying-Shao Hsu, Hyunju Lee, Aik Ling Tan & Siew Wei Tho (30 Aug
2024): School students’ aspirations for STEM careers: the influence of self-concept, parental
expectations, career outcome expectations, and perceptions of STEM professionals, Asia
Pacific Journal of Education, DOI: 10.1080/02188791.2024.2394506
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2394506
Published online: 30 Aug 2024.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 37
View related articles
View Crossmark data

School students’ aspirations for STEM careers: the inuence of
self-concept, parental expectations, career outcome
expectations, and perceptions of STEM professionals
Chaoqun Lu
a
, Winnie Wing Mui So
b
, Yu Chen
a
, Antuni Wiyarsi
c
,
Wing Kai Stephen Chiu
b
, Yeonjoo Ko
d
, Ying-Shao Hsu
e
, Hyunju Lee
f
,
Aik Ling Tan
g
and Siew Wei Tho
h
a
Faculty of Education, University of Macau, Taipa, Macao SAR;
b
Department of Science and Environmental Studies,
The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR;
c
Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Negeri
Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia;
d
Department of Science Education, Jeju National University, Jeju, Korea;
e
Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan;
f
Department of
Science Education, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea;
g
Department of Natural Science and Science Education,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore;
h
Department of Physics, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (UPSI),
Tanjung Malim, Malaysia
ABSTRACT
This study examined the processes that contributed to students’ aspira-
tions for STEM careers and unpacked the relationships between students’
self-concept in science and mathematics learning, perceived parental
expectations, perceptions of STEM professionals, career outcome expecta-
tions and STEM career aspirations. Structural equation modelling was
used to analyse quantitative survey data of 2,477 primary and secondary
school students studying in seven Asian regions (Hong Kong, Malaysia,
Mainland China, Indonesia, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore). The results
demonstrated that students’ self-concept, perceptions of STEM profes-
sionals, and their career outcome expectations all signicantly and posi-
tively predicted their aspirations for STEM careers. However, this study
failed to establish a direct relationship or positive correlation between
perceived parental expectations and STEM career aspirations. Students’
self-concept negatively predicted their career outcome expectations
related to seeking parental approval. While no signicant positive eects
of perceived parental expectations on career aspirations were found, an
indirect eect of perceived parental expectations on STEM career aspira-
tions via career outcome expectations was observed. Moreover, career
outcome expectations mediated the relationships between students’
STEM career aspirations and their perceptions of STEM professionals
more strongly than self-concept. The implications of these results for
STEM education are discussed.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 6 July 2023
Accepted 5 July 2024
KEYWORDS
STEM career aspirations; self-
concept; parental
expectations; STEM
professionals; outcome
expectations
Introduction
Science Technology Engineering Mathematics (STEM) was formulated by the American National
Science Foundation in 2001 to address the decreasing number of people studying and working in
the elds of STEM (Breiner et al., 2012; Burušić et al., 2021). To strengthen the supply of the STEM-
related workforce, STEM education has been an emerging educational phenomenon in a variety of
CONTACT Winnie Wing Mui So wiso@eduhk.hk Department of Science and Environmental Studies, The Education
University of Hong Kong, 10 Lo Ping Road, Taipo, N.T., Hong Kong SAR
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2394506
© 2024 National Institute of Education, Singapore

countries and regions (Chu et al., 2022), including many Asian regions such as China, Korea and
Malaysia. Providing high-quality STEM education is expected to ignite students’ desire and aspiration
to pursue STEM careers and to further stimulate economic growth and enhance STEM innovation. As
a result, there is a growing interest in the development of STEM career aspirations in students.
STEM career aspiration, a subset of career aspiration, represents an individual’s strong desire for
high achievement within a STEM career eld (Kitchen et al., 2018; Mau & Li, 2018). The development
of students’ STEM career aspirations is a complex problem because the knowledge of the STEM
choice process is spread across several dierent disciplines that are not well-connected (van Tuijl &
van der Molen, 2016). Given this, it is important for the study to track the mechanism that plays
a pivotal role in the development of STEM career aspirations, uncovering which factors inuence or
mediate the relationship. This may provide insights to guide teachers’ educational and professional
development and contribute to our understanding of how STEM career aspirations are formed.
Although a growing body of research (e.g., Mau & Li, 2018; Sahin & Waxman, 2021; So et al., 2022)
has investigated the relationships between STEM career aspirations and self-ecacy or self-concept,
parental inuence and occupational perceptions, no study has systematically explored the mechan-
ism and extent of these predictors, particularly the mediating role of career outcome expectations in
these relationships. Career outcome expectations refer to one’s perceptions of certain careers based
on one’s perceived nancial, societal, and self-satisfaction outcomes (Nugent et al., 2015), which may
have an important eect on career behaviour (Bandura, 1986). It is necessary to include career
outcome expectations when identifying the underlying mechanism of STEM career aspirations.
Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relationships between STEM career aspirations and
students’ self-concept in science and mathematics learning, their perceived parental expectations for
academic performance, and perceptions of STEM professionals, and to examine the mediating
eects of career outcome expectations regarding individual, parental, and societal aspects in these
complex relationships. For the purposes of this study, a holistic framework, Social Cognitive Career
Theory (SSCT; Lent et al., 1994), which links career development and education and considers the
learning experiences prior to one’s beliefs and the contextual inuences during the period from
one’s interest to actual action, was used as the basis for the hypothetical model.
Literature review
Career aspiration refers to an individual’s ambitions or decisions for a particular career path in which
they aspire to take a leadership role and continue their education (Cozart & Rojewski, 2015). As
a subset of career aspirations, STEM career aspirations represent an individual’s strong desire for high
achievement within a STEM career eld (Kitchen et al., 2018; Mau & Li, 2018). Due to the longstanding
issue of students’ lack of interest or aspirations in STEM (Du & Wong, 2019), a growing number of
studies have been dedicated to investigating the factors that inuence students’ STEM career
aspirations and uncovered some of the factors such as perceptions of STEM professionals, parents’
education level, self-concept or self-ecacy, and outcome expectations. However, compared to
much of the research on career aspirations, research on career aspirations for specic elds in STEM
remains limited (Mau & Li, 2018). The following section details the factors that may inuence
students’ aspirations for STEM careers.
Self-concept
Self-concept is generally characterised as one’s self-perceptions formed through experience with
and interpretations of the environment (Shavelson et al., 1976). It is consistently viewed as a critical
factor in predicting an individual’s decision-making and success in life (Choy & Yeung, 2022). There
are two main categories of self-concepts: academic self-concepts and non-academic self-concepts;
the former is about one’s self-concept in general school subjects, while the latter encompasses
social, emotional, and physical self-concepts (Marsh & Craven, 2006). In the eld of STEM education,
2C. LU ET AL.

researchers stress the importance of students’ academic self-concepts, especially in maths and
science learning, in the development of their career aspirations. Self-concepts in science and
mathematics relate to how students perceive their scientic and mathematical abilities based on
their experiences and the extent to which they are recognised by others for their scientic and
mathematical abilities (Shavelson et al., 1976).
A small number of studies have documented the positive impacts of students’ self-concept in
predicting their STEM career aspirations, while revealing possible gender and cultural dierences in
the relationship. For example, students with higher mathematical self-concept were more likely to
choose STEM elds, revealing a gender gap where the importance of mathematical self-concept
diminished over time for women but not for men in predicting STEM career aspirations (Sax et al.,
2015). The ndings from Watt et al. (2017) study further support this result, indicating that the self-
concepts in mathematics of female students in Australasia positively inuenced their STEM career
preferences. However, this eect was not observed for male students in Australia and for a sample
from the U.S. consisting of both female and male students. These ndings provide additional insight
into the potential presence of cultural dierences in these relationships, in addition to gender
dierences. Apart from mathematical self-concept, those students who had higher self-concepts of
science competence were more likely to pursue science-related study or work (Kang & Keinonen,
2018; Kang et al., 2021). Despite the evident predictive role of self-concepts in science and mathe-
matics, previous studies on STEM career aspirations have predominantly focused on self-concepts in
either science or mathematics separately, rather than exploring their integrated impact.
Consequently, the potential combined predictive eect of mathematical and science self-concepts
has remained unknown, thus warranting investigation in this study.
Parental expectations
Parents – the people closest to their children who can provide them with essential information about
STEM careers – also play a crucial role in shaping students’ career aspirations for STEM (Tey et al.,
2020). They have been found to be one of the top factors inuencing students’ STEM career choices
(Sahin & Waxman, 2021), and the inuence of parental factors on STEM career aspirations is
signicant regardless of the students’ gender and grade level (Woo et al., 2021). Past studies
regarding parental factors on students’ STEM career aspirations have examined various aspects,
including parental expectations, attitudes, support, encouragement, involvement, and educational
level, with particular attention given to the inuence of parental expectations. Parental expectations
are generally characterised as parents’ realistic beliefs or judgements about their children’s future
achievements (Yamamoto & Holloway, 2010). The positive impact of parental expectations on
students’ likelihood of majoring in STEM in college and further their career aspiration has been
documented (Lloyd et al., 2018; Mau & Li, 2018; Sahin et al., 2017; Woong Lee et al., 2015). However,
such an eect on students’ career aspirations may decrease, unless the students themselves perceive
them (Šimunović et al., 2018). As such, Chen et al. (2022) focused on student-perceived parental
expectations and found that the long-term perceived parental expectations were strongly associated
with students’ STEM career aspirations.
Student perceptions of STEM professionals
An individual’s career aspirations are a reection of their endeavours to seek a profession that aligns
with their personal characteristics. As individuals mature, they compare their self-concept with the
images of STEM professionals, gradually shaping their perception of acceptable career paths
(Gottfredson, 2005). Thus, occupational perceptions play a vital role in the career development
process of students (Gottfredson, 2005). Previous research ndings have demonstrated that students
who hold positive perceptions of STEM professionals in terms of their personal abilities and social
competence were more inclined to be interested in STEM elds (So et al., 2022). Gender dierences
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 3

were identied in the study, with female students especially showing higher interest in STEM careers
when they held stronger beliefs that STEM professionals could build good social relationships with
others. In contrast, students who hold stereotypes of STEM professionals often exhibit reduced
interest or goals in STEM-related areas (Garriott et al., 2017; Scholes & Stahl, 2020). However, Luo
et al. (2021) reported an inconsistent result, as they found no direct relationship between students’
perceptions of STEM professionals and their career interests in related elds. Their study further
revealed a potential indirect eect, where STEM stereotypes inuenced students’ career interests
through the mediating factors of self-ecacy and outcome expectations. Many of these studies have
predominantly focused on examining the inuence of perceived STEM professionals on career
interest, overlooking the nuanced distinctions between career interest and career aspirations.
Career interests typically reect current attitudes towards a specic eld, while aspirations encom-
pass a deeper level of commitment and investment in that eld. In this sense, career interests are like
the aspiration for careers but show weaker commitment (Luo et al., 2021). As a result, the relationship
between students’ perceptions of STEM professionals and their aspirations for related careers
warrants further investigation.
Outcome expectations as a mediator
Outcome expectations are the expected consequences of a particular action (i.e., “If I do this, what
will happen?”) (Bandura, 1977, 1986; Lent et al., 1994; Nugent et al., 2015). An individual’s percep-
tions of certain careers based on their perceived nancial, societal, and self-satisfaction outcomes are
referred to as career outcome expectations that may have an important eect on their career
behaviour (Bandura, 1986; Nugent et al., 2015). Drawing from previous research and relevant
theories, we propose that career outcome expectations mediate the relationship between the
predictors mentioned (self-concept, parental expectations, and perceived STEM professionals) and
career aspirations. Such a hypothesis is further explained below.
The choice model of SCCT has suggested the predictive role of outcome expectations in career
interests or goals (Lent et al., 2000). This argument was further supported by several subsequent
empirical studies. For instance, Abe and Chikoko’s (Abe & Chikoko, 2020) study revealed that
students acknowledged the inuence of career outcome expectations on their career decisions,
indicating a potentially positive impact on STEM career aspirations. This nding aligns with the
results from Nugent et al.’s (2015) study, which demonstrated that students who hold high expecta-
tions for positive outcomes in STEM careers tend to exhibit greater interest in pursuing such careers.
Indeed, the SCCT model has proposed the mediating role of outcome expectations in the
relationship between self-ecacy and career aspirations. Fouad and Smith (1996) discovered that
self-ecacy had both a direct impact on interests and an indirect inuence on career interests
through outcome expectations. Specically, students with higher self-ecacy in mathematics or
science were more likely to pursue STEM careers (Navarro et al., 2007). While the relationships among
self-ecacy, outcome expectations and career aspirations have received attention from scholars, the
role of self-concept, which is also a powerful predictor of STEM career aspirations, has not been
explored as extensively. This is probably because of the nuanced dierences between self-ecacy
and self-concepts. The former refers to people’s perceptions of their capacities to achieve specic
levels of performance that have an impact on events in their life (Bandura, 1997), and the latter is self-
concepts formed through experience with and interpretations of their environments (Shavelson
et al., 1976). Although self-ecacy and self-concept are similar in their focus on perceived compe-
tence, content concreteness and prediction of future performance, emotion and motivation (Bong &
Skaalvik, 2003), self-ecacy is prospective, whereas self-concept is primarily based on achievement
and context (Marsh et al., 2019). Theoretical and measurement advances in academic self-concepts
have opened up possibilities for conceptual connections with social cognitive theory (Lent et al.,
1997). In Nugent et al.’s (2015) study, the hypothesized relationship between self-ecacy in STEM
learning and STEM career aspirations was not supported, suggesting that self-concept may be
4C. LU ET AL.

a more eective predictor of STEM career aspirations for students. Building upon this, Kang and
Keinonen (2018) integrated self-concept into the SCCT model and demonstrated its contribution to
shaping future aspirations. Therefore, this study focused on self-concept rather than self-ecacy to
provide further insights into this area.
The relationships between outcome expectations and the other two predictors of career aspira-
tions, namely parental expectations and perceived STEM professionals, suggest a potential mediat-
ing role of outcome expectations. Outcome expectations can be categorized into dierent classes,
such as physical outcomes (e.g., nancial gain or loss, lifestyle, risk, and setting), social outcomes
(e.g., societal status, parental approval, approval from friends or peers), and self-outcomes (e.g.,
intrinsic motivation or rewards) (Bandura, 1986). Considering the signicant inuence that parents
have on career aspirations, the expectation of gaining parental approval may be regarded as a type
of social career outcome expectation. Theoretically, it is reasonable to infer that parental expecta-
tions regarding their children’s STEM academic performance or future careers could be associated
with specic career outcome expectations, particularly those related to gaining recognition from
parents. However, the extent to which parental expectations predict STEM career outcome expecta-
tions and their indirect inuence on STEM career aspirations through outcome expectations has not
been extensively investigated. This represents a gap in the current understanding of the relationship.
In the case of perceived STEM professionals, a qualitative study has shown that individuals who hold
negative perceptions of technical engineering also tend to have negative outcome expectations
regarding pursuing a career in engineering (Holmegaard et al., 2014; Luo et al., 2021). Furthermore,
outcome expectations have been found to mediate the relationship between perceived STEM
professionals and STEM career interests (Luo et al., 2021). This suggests that the perception of
STEM professionals can impact individuals’ outcome expectations, which, in turn, inuence their
interests in pursuing STEM careers.
Previous research has explored various motivational factors inuencing students’ career aspira-
tions in STEM elds. However, several gaps still exist in our understanding of students’ STEM career
aspirations. First, most research has primarily focused on self-ecacy within the model of the SCCT,
overlooking the potential connections between academic self-concepts and the SCCT model.
Second, studies have often examined self-concepts in science or mathematics separately, failing to
explore the integrated impact of academic self-concepts. Additionally, while the individual contribu-
tions of self-concept, parental expectations, and perceived STEM professionals in predicting career
aspirations have been observed, their integrated eects require further investigation to reect real-
world situations. Although the importance of outcome expectations has been acknowledged,
a deeper understanding of their mediating role is still lacking, necessitating additional exploration
and empirical evidence. Taking these gaps into consideration, this study aims to examine the
complex relationships within career aspirations and shed light on the mediating power of outcome
expectations. While gender and cultural dierences have been observed in these relationships
according to past research, this study focuses on conducting an in-depth analysis of the dierent
dimensions of outcome expectations as mediators, controlling for demographic variables. The
following two research questions are proposed:
(1) What are the relationships among self-concept in science and mathematics learning, parental
educational expectations, perceptions of STEM professionals, and STEM career aspirations of
elementary and secondary school students?
(2) What are the mediating eects of the career outcome expectations regarding individual,
parental, and societal aspects in these relationships?
To answer the research questions, a hypothetical model for this study was formulated (Figure 1).
The theoretical foundation was provided by SCCT (Lent et al., 1994), which has been used to
explain the processes by which people develop interests, make choices, achieve and maintain
performance, and experience satisfaction in educational and career-related contexts (Lent &
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 5

Brown, 2013). Originating from Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory (SCT) and its application
to career development, SCCT includes three core concepts: self-ecacy (perceived capabilities),
outcome expectations (beliefs about the outcomes of certain eorts), and goals (the determina-
tion to engage in a particular activity or to strive for a particular future outcome) (Lent et al.,
1994).
In our hypothetical model, we have dened STEM career aspirations as the goal construct,
representing students’ strong desire for high achievement within a STEM career eld (Kitchen
et al., 2018; Mau & Li, 2018). The model also includes three key constructs as predictors of STEM
career aspirations based on the SCCT framework and previous empirical studies. These constructs
are self-concept in science and mathematics learning, parental expectations, and perceptions of
STEM professionals. We chose to include self-concept rather than self-ecacy in our model,
considering the limited research on self-concept and its potential as a more powerful predictor of
students’ STEM career aspirations (Nugent et al., 2015). Self-concept in science and mathematics
learning in this model refers to how students perceive their abilities in these subjects (Shavelson
et al., 1976). Parental expectations encompass parents’ beliefs or judgements about their chil-
dren’s future academic achievement, such as course grades and college attendance. Perceptions
of STEM professionals are also included in the model, recognizing that one’s career choice can be
inuenced by occupational images. Occupational images encompass various generalizations
about a particular occupation, including the personalities of people in that eld, the nature of
the work they do, and the perceived rewards and conditions of the work (Gottfredson, 2005).
Based on empirical studies and the theoretical framework, we hypothesised that career outcome
expectations mediate the relationships between the three key predictors (self-concept, parental
expectations, and perceptions of STEM professionals) and STEM career aspirations. Bandura
(1986) identied dierent classes of outcome expectations, such as monetary, approval, and self-
satisfaction. To provide a detailed understanding of the mechanism underlying students’ career
development, we specically classied the mediating construct of outcome expectations into
three types: individual outcome expectations, parental outcome expectations, and societal out-
come expectations.
Figure 1. Model of hypothetical relationships in the study (the paths are numbered. For example, path 1 indicates the path from
self-concept to STEM career aspirations.)
6C. LU ET AL.

Methodology
Participants
Participants were recruited through convenience sampling. The questionnaires were distributed
through schools with the consent of the principals and parents. Arranged by teachers, students
completed the questionnaire with the weblinks provided to each participating school in their own
languages. To ensure the accuracy and consistency of the translations, we collaborated with experts
from the respective regions. In this project, we had collaborators who were familiar with the target
languages and cultures, and they played a vital role in examining the accuracy and consistency of the
translation. In order to reduce method bias in the data collection process (Podsako et al., 2012),
participants were simply told general information about the study in layman’s terms. A total of 2,477
valid responses were collected from students across the three key learning stage students, including
756 senior primary school responses (M
age
= 11.73, S.D. = 1.75), 1,006 junior secondary responses
(M
age
= 14.83, S.D. = 0.94), and 715 senior secondary responses (M
age
= 17.14, S.D. = 0.79). Data were
collected from seven Asian regions, namely Hong Kong, Mainland China (Guangdong Province),
Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Singapore. Of the participants, 53.7% were female and 46.3%
male. The information about the participants is presented in Table 1.
Questionnaire instrument
The participants were surveyed using ve scales (i.e., self-concept in science and mathematics
learning, student-perceived parental expectations regarding academic performance, students’ per-
ceptions of STEM professionals, career outcome expectations, and STEM career aspirations) together
with relevant basic background information such as gender and regions/countries. The operational
denitions of the ve constructs are shown in Table 2. All items on the ve constructs were measured
on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, 4 = Strongly agree). Higher
scores indicate higher levels of participant agreement with each item statement. Most items were
adapted from the questionnaires developed by Archer and DeWitt (2016) and DeWitt et al. (2013),
which have been widely used by researchers to study students’ STEM-related aspirations and
interests such as Mihelich et al. (2016) and DeWitt and Archer (2015). Information on the question-
naire instruments used is detailed below.
(a) Self-concept in science and mathematics learning. A seven-item scale selected from
a questionnaire developed by DeWitt et al. (2013) was adopted to measure the students’ self-
concept in science and mathematics learning. The original items were revised to specically
refer to local contexts. Sample items include “I understand most of the things in my math
learning” and “I do well in science-related subjects”.
(b) Student-perceived parental expectations regarding academic performance. A four-item scale
adapted from Archer and Dewitt’s (2016) questionnaire was utilized to assess students’
Table 1. Demographics of the sample.
Senior primary Junior secondary Senior secondary Number of participants Percentage
Location Hong Kong 343 194 70 607 24.5%
Mainland China 96 119 88 303 12.2%
Indonesia 0 165 135 300 12.1%
Korea 63 87 32 182 7.3%
Malaysia 120 117 116 353 14.3%
Taiwan 70 0 111 181 7.3%
Singapore 64 324 163 551 21.2%
Gender Female 383 528 478 1,329 53.7%
Male 373 478 297 1,148 46.3%
Total 2,477 100%
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 7

perceptions of the expectations their parents have for their academic performance. Sample
items are “It is important to my parents that I have good academic performance” and “It is
important to my parents that I try my best in school”.
(c) Students’ perceptions of STEM professionals. This seven-item scale was adapted from Archer
and DeWitt (2016) and was distributed to the students to investigate their occupational
images of STEM professionals. A sample item is “STEM professionals are naturally very
intelligent”.
(d) Career outcome expectations. To examine the degree of students’ career outcome expecta-
tions for STEM learning with respect to the individual, parental, and societal aspects, a nine-
item scale was used. There are three subscales: 1) career outcome expectations with respect
to the individual aspect (3 items, e.g., “I learn STEM to equip myself to cope with future
work”), 2) career outcome expectations with respect to the parental aspect (3 items, e.g., “I
learn STEM to meet my parents” expectations regarding my future career’), and 3) career
outcome expectations with respect to the societal aspect (3 items, e.g., “I learn STEM to
become a future talented member of society”). These items were developed based on the
statements in the “2017 White Paper on STEM Education in China” and the statements of
certain reports on Hong Kong STEM Education.
(e) STEM career aspirations. To measure students’ future job intentions and the types of careers
they aspire to, a seven-item scale adapted from Archer and DeWitt (2016) was used. A sample
item is “When I grow up, I would like to work in science (laboratory tests, nutritional science,
and environmental science)”.
Data analysis
The questionnaire items were largely adapted from DeWitt et al. (2013), including the
variables: self-concept, perceived parental expectations, perceptions of STEM professionals,
and STEM career aspirations. Although the questionnaire items for career outcome expecta-
tions were newly developed, a priori hypothetical structure of this construct was established
based on the literature. Therefore, conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) was directly conducted
to identify whether the number of constructs and the loadings of the measured variables on
them conformed to what is expected based on pre-established theory (Kline, 2013).
Particularly, we performed a second-order CFA on the career outcome expectation construct
as it has three dimensions – individual, parental and societal. Missing data were handled
using maximum likelihood estimation as recommended by Allison (2003) and Hair (2006).
Reliability tests were then run for each factor. We used Cronbach’s alpha to gauge the
reliability of these factors except for the multidimensional factor, namely career outcome
expectation. By using McNeish’s (2018) tool, coecient H was calculated to indicate the
reliability of the career outcome expectation scale. This was followed by a Pearson
Table 2. Operational definitions of the five constructs.
Constructs Operational definitions
(a) Self-concept in science and
mathematics learning
Students’ perceptions and beliefs about their own abilities, skills, and competence in
mathematics and science.
(b) Student-perceived parental
expectation
Students’ perceptions of the expectations their parents have for their academic
performance.
(c) Students’ perceptions of STEM
professionals.
Students’ perceptions of the characteristics, roles, and occupations associated with
STEM professionals
(d) Career outcome expectations The extent to which students anticipate specific career outcomes or benefits as
a result of their participation in STEM careers, which includes consideration of
personal, parental, and societal factors that may influence their expectations of
future career paths and opportunities.
(e) STEM career aspirations Students’ desire to pursue STEM-related careers
8C. LU ET AL.

correlation analysis via SPSS to gain a preliminary understanding of the relationships
between variables in the study. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was performed via
AMOS to explore the mediating role of career outcome expectations with respect to the
individual, parental, and societal areas in the relationship between self-concept, perceived
parental expectations, perceptions of STEM professionals, and STEM career aspirations.
SEM is a method used to run multiple regressions simultaneously (Pedhazur, 1997),
allowing the testing of hypotheses about how factors are related to each other (Schreiber
et al., 2006). To evaluate the model t of the measurement model from the CFA and of the
structural model, the two absolute t indices [the goodness-of-t index (GFI) and Chi-square
(χ
2
)] and four additional t indices, namely the comparative t index (CFI), the root mean
square error of approximation (RMSEA), the Tucker – Lewis index (TLI), standardized root
mean squared residual (SRMR) were used. As recommended, the thresholds for the t indices
in this study are as follows: (a) the GFI should be greater than .90 (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1996);
(b) the CFI is recommended to be greater than. 90 (Bentler & Bonett, 1980); (c) RMSEA less
than 0.08 indicates an acceptable t (Browne & Cudeck, 1992); (d) the TLI should be greater
than .90 (Bentler & Bonett, 1980); and (e) SRMR is recommended to be less than 0.08 (Hu &
Bentler, 1999). Variables that may be related to students’ STEM career aspirations were
controlled for, namely gender, stage of education, and regions.
The standardised and unstandardised direct eects and the indirect eects of self-ecacy,
parental expectations, and perceptions of STEM professionals on STEM career aspirations were
calculated in the model. The signicance of these indirect eects was analysed using bootstrapping
procedures. The unstandardized indirect eects were calculated for each of 1,000 bootstrapped
samples, and the 95 percent condence interval was used.
Results
Validity and reliability analyses
After several rounds of CFA, one item under the variable of self-concept was removed due to low
factor loadings. The standardized regression weights in the CFA ranged from 0.37 to 0.96. The t
indices of the CFA results are shown in Table 3, indicating that the data t the model well except
for model χ
2
, which is susceptible to large sample sizes. The Cronbach’s alpha values of the
nalized unidimensional variables were between .67 and .86, indicating the acceptable internal
consistency reliability of the questionnaire (Ursachi et al., 2015). The coecient H alpha of the
multidimensional factor (career outcome expectation) was .97, suggesting sucient reliability of
the instrument.
Correlation analyses
Table 4 presents the means, standard deviations and correlations among variables. The Pearson
correlation coecient r can be interpreted as low (.30 < r < .50), medium (.50 < r < .70), high
(.70 < r < .90), or very high (.90 < r < 1.00; Mukaka, 2012). As such, moderate correlations were
Table 3. Fit indices of the CFA models of the instruments.
χ
2
df p GFI CFI TLI RMSEA SRMR
SC 45.34 6 <.001 .994 .994 .985 .051 .022
PE 5.13 1 =.023 .999 .998 .987 .041 .009
SP 184.81 12 <.001 .981 .976 .958 .076 .036
OE 173.08 24 <.001 .985 .990 .958 .050 .020
SAC 173.64 13 <.001 .981 .977 .963 .071 .030
Note. SC: Self-concept in science and mathematics learning; PE: Parental expectations regarding their children’s academic
performance; SP: Perceptions of STEM professionals; OE: Career outcome expectations; SCA: STEM career aspirations.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 9

observed between students’ individual career outcome expectations and societal career out-
come expectations (r = .652, p < .01), as well as their career outcome expectations regarding the
parental aspect (r = .500, p < .01). Students’ career outcome expectations on the parental aspect
were also correlated with their career outcome expectations on the societal aspect at a low
level (r = .463, p < .01). The correlation between these three variables is understandable because
they are all part of a multidimensional factor – career outcome expectations.
Additionally, students’ career aspirations for STEM were associated with their perceptions of
STEM professionals (r = .313, p < .01) and their expectations of career outcomes in all three areas:
individual (r = .393, p < .01), parental (r = .333, p < .01), and societal (r = .384, p < .01). Students’
perceptions of STEM professionals were also found to correlate at a low level with their career
outcome expectations regarding the individual (r = .435, p < .01) and societal (r = .435, p < .01)
aspects. However, only a low correlation was found in the variable of student-perceived parental
expectations of their academic performance with their expectations of career outcomes on the
part of their parents (r = .375, p < .01).
Test of the structural model
The structural portion of the model was introduced based on the results of the correlation analysis and
our assumptions about the relationships between the above variables. The model was found to have
a good t with all values being within the recommended threshold except for the model χ
2
, which is
susceptible to large sample sizes. For the model, GFI = .920 was obtained along with CFI = .925, TLI = .915,
RMSEA = .048 and SRMR = .052. Taken together, the values of these measures of model t indicated that
the model t the data well, representing the observed relationships among the variables introduced in
the model.
Results of the structural model are shown in Figure 2, with standardised coecients being
reported. Regarding the eects of students’ self-concept in science and mathematics learning on
other variables, it indicated a positive correlation with students’ career aspirations to STEM (β = .121,
p < .001) and career outcome expectations regarding the individual aspect (β = .095, p < .001) and
the societal aspect (β = .060, p < .01), while it presented negative relations with career outcome
expectations regarding the parental aspect (β = −.054, p < .01). As expected, positive and predictive
eects of perceived parental expectations on career outcome expectations with respect to the three
aspects – individual (β = .237, p < .001), parental (β = .357, p < .001), and societal (β = .223, p < .001),
were observed. Students’ perceptions of STEM professionals were positively associated with the
individual (β = .417, p < .001), parental (β = .191, p < .001), and societal (β = .428, p < .001) aspects,
and students’ perceived STEM professionals were indicated as the most powerful predictors of career
outcome expectations regarding the individual and societal aspects. Moreover, students who had
positive perceptions of STEM professionals were more likely to aspire to STEM-related careers as
positive direct eects of students’ perceptions of STEM professionals on their STEM career aspirations
were observed (β = .155, p < .001). Regarding students’ career aspirations for STEM, all three latent
Table 4. Means, standard deviations (SD), and correlations for variables (N = 2,477).
Variable
Correlation
M SD1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. SC 1 2.704 .638
2. PE .064** 1 3.132 .565
3. SP .187** .251** 1 3.173 .552
4. IOE .192** .290** .435** 1 3.212 .672
5. POE .023 .375** .272** .500** 1 2.687 .858
6. SOE .155** .288** .435** .652** .463** 1 3.202 .688
7. SCA .188** .199** .313** .393** .333** .384** 1 2.574 .707
Note. **Correlation is significant at the .01 level, two-tailed. IOE: Individual aspect of career outcome expectations; POE: Parental
aspect of career outcome expectations; SOE: Societal aspect of career outcome expectations.
10 C. LU ET AL.

variables – individual (β =.158, p < .001), parental (β = .136, p < .001), and societal (β = .116, p < .001)
career outcome expectations – showed positive relations to STEM career aspirations.
The total indirect eect of the three predictors (SC, PE, and SP) on STEM career aspirations was
.282 (p < .01). Specically, the total standardized indirect eect of perceived parental expectations on
STEM career aspirations was .129 (p < .01), while the total indirect eect of perceptions of STEM
professionals was .136 (p < .01). However, the total indirect eect of self-concept on STEM career
aspirations was not signicant.
As shown in Table 5, the bootstrapped indirect eect of students’ self-concept in science and
mathematics learning on their aspiration for STEM careers via career outcome expectations regard-
ing individual aspect was .017 (p < .01, [C.I.] = .008, .031), parental aspect was −.008 (p < .05, [C.I.] =
−.0168, −.003), and societal aspects was .008 (p < .01, [C.I.] = .003, .017). Regarding the bootstrapped
indirect eects of parental expectations on STEM career aspiration via the three aspects of career
outcome expectations, the indirect eect via individual aspect was .043 (p < .05, [C.I.] = .022, .068),
the indirect eect via the parental aspect was .056 (p < .05, [C.I.] = .036, .080), while the indirect eect
via the societal aspect was .030 (p < .05, [C.I.] = .013, .052). Moreover, the bootstrapped indirect eect
of students’ perceptions of STEM professionals on their aspiration for STEM-related jobs via their
Figure 2. Diagram and standard path coefficients of the structural model. Note. The non-significant paths were excluded for ease
of presentation. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 11

career outcome expectations regarding the individual aspect was .063 (p < .05, [C.I.] = .035, .097),
parental aspect was .025 (p < .05, [C.I.] = .016, .037), and societal aspect was .048 (p < .05, [C.I.] = .020,
.078). The results showed that the nine specic indirect paths to STEM career aspiration were all
signicant.
Discussion
The results found in this study have substantial issues worthy of discussion, which are presented in
the following three subsections.
Relationships among self-concept in science and mathematics learning, career outcome
expectations, and STEM career aspiration
In line with the results of previous studies (Kang & Keinonen, 2018; Kang et al., 2021; Sax et al., 2015;
Watt et al., 2017) that focused on students’ self-concepts in either science or mathematics separately,
this study found the combined predictive eect of mathematical and science self-concepts in
students’ career aspirations. This study also revealed noteworthy ndings regarding the relationship
between students’ self-concept and their career outcome expectations. Specically, self-concept was
positively correlated with career outcome expectations in terms of meeting personal needs and
contributing to society, but negatively correlated with gaining parental approval and recognition.
Considering the male-dominated nature of the STEM eld, potential gender dierences may exist in
these relationships because men’s self-ecacy or self-concept beliefs are often shaped by their
interpretations of personal accomplishments and successes, whereas women’s self-ecacy or self-
concept beliefs are more inuenced by relational events in their lives (Zeldin et al., 2008). As a result,
female students may place greater emphasis on career outcome expectations driven by parental
factors, while male students may prioritize expectations driven by individual and societal reasons.
Additionally, a potential explanation for the observed negative relationship between students’
self-concept and their expected outcomes of pursuing STEM careers to meet parental expectations is
that students who perceive academic achievement as a means to full their parents’ career expecta-
tions may experience heightened stress and anxiety in their studies. These students experiencing
anxiety and stress related to academic performance tend to focus more on the fear of failure rather
than the potential for success (Bandura, 1986, 1997; Lent et al., 1994). This tendency may be
especially prevalent among the students in our study who are primarily from Asian regions and
are inuenced by traditional Asian cultural values (i.e., Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism). These
cultural values emphasise concepts such as obedience to family (Ma et al., 2018). As a result, despite
students’ high self-concept in science and mathematics learning, they may experience greater stress
and anxiety if they perceive that they are learning for their parents’ sake, which may further
negatively aect their aspiration for related work, as presented by the negative indirect impact of
self-concept on career aspiration through outcome expectations for parental reasons. Such an
Table 5. Results of the indirect effects based on structural equation modelling.
Paths
Standardised estimates
(β)
95% C.I.
pLower Upper
SCA←IOE ←SC .017 .008 .031 .001
SCA←POE←SC −.008 −.016 −.003 .011
SCA←SOE←SC .008 .003 .017 .006
SCA←IOE←PE .043 .022 .068 .001
SCA←POE←PE .056 .036 .080 .001
SCA←SOE←PE .030 .013 .052 .005
SCA←IOE←SP .063 .035 .097 .001
SCA←POE←SP .025 .016 .037 .001
SCA←SOE←SP .048 .020 .078 .006
12 C. LU ET AL.

explanation supports the statement indicated by Sahin et al. (2017) that there is an optimal range for
parental expectations and this range needs to be further determined. Additionally, in light of
possible gender and cultural dierences in the relationship between self-concept and career aspira-
tions, future research may deepen this study by investigating the role of dierent regions and
genders in these relationships, particularly in the mediating eect of career outcome expectations.
Signicances of parental expectations
The ndings of this study showed that perceived parental expectations may not have a direct impact
on students’ aspirations for STEM careers, which diers from prior research that parental expecta-
tions inuence students’ persistence in STEM elds (Lloyd et al., 2018; Mau & Li, 2018; Sahin et al.,
2017; Woong Lee et al., 2015). This dierence may be attributed to students’ perceived parental
expectations being lower than parents’ actual expectations (Šimunović et al., 2018). In addition, Chen
et al. (2022) distinguished between short-term and long-term perceived parental expectations and
found that only long-term perceived parental expectations were strongly associated with students’
STEM career aspirations. The ndings of Chen et al.’s study may provide further insight into our
results, suggesting that the perceived parental expectations among these students were primarily
focused on short-term academic performance rather than long-term career prospects. Although
a direct relationship between perceived parental expectations and career aspirations for STEM
careers has not been established, this study revealed an indirect eect of students’ perceived
parental expectations on their STEM career aspirations through career outcome expectations. This
may indicate that mere changes in parental expectations for academic achievement may not have
a direct impact on students’ career choices. To cultivate students’ aspirations for STEM careers, it
becomes crucial to nurture their career outcome expectations, which are inuenced by parental
expectations. In specic, this study highlights three key aspects in which career outcome expecta-
tions can be fostered: parental, individual, and societal, as it found parental expectations indirectly
aected STEM career aspirations through outcome expectations for parental, personal, and societal
aspects. To summarise, the absence of direct eects from perceived parental expectations on STEM
career aspirations may not imply that parental expectations play a less important role in students’
STEM career aspirations. Rather, perceived parental expectations for students’ academic perfor-
mance might be signicant, and this study’ndings remind us to be aware of the mediating eects
of career outcome expectations on the relationship.
Eect of students’ perceptions of STEM professionals on career aspiration through career
outcome expectations
The results of this study revealed that students who had positive perceptions of STEM
professionals were more likely to aspire to STEM-related jobs, which echoes the view of
Gottfredson (2005) that students’ perceived occupational images have inuences on their
career aspirations. Signicantly, this study identied and examined three dimensions of
career outcome expectations, as proposed by Bandura (1986), and specically explored
their mediating eects on the relationship between students’ occupational perceptions and
their aspirations for STEM careers. The ndings underscored that students’ STEM career
aspirations are inuenced by their perceptions of STEM professionals through these three
aspects of career outcome expectations, which hold notable signicance in individual and
societal aspects. This inuence could potentially be attributed to the fact that occupational
perceptions reect students’ knowledge of STEM work, workers, activities, and work environ-
ments that subtly inuence their career preferences in STEM elds. The results of the present
study extend not only the ndings of Luo et al. (2021) with respect to career aspirations, but
also the mediating role of three specic dimensions of career outcome expectations.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 13

Conclusions
The ndings of this study have several practical implications for teacher professional devel-
opment and education. Although no direct relationship was found between perceived
parental expectations and career aspirations, the ndings of this study emphasize the
importance of parents in fostering students’ STEM career aspirations and highlight the
mediating role of career outcome expectations. Educators can work with parents to create
an environment that encourages and supports students’ pursuit of STEM careers. It is
important for educators to promote parental involvement and provide resources and gui-
dance for parents to eectively engage in STEM-related activities and discussions with their
children. In addition, further research can be conducted to determine the optimal range of
parental expectations and to ensure that their expectations are supportive and realistic in
order to positively shape students’ career aspirations.
One of the limitations of this study lies in the selection of the sample, which focused solely on seven
Asian regions. The omission of other Asian regions such as Central Asia may restrict the generalizability
of the ndings to a broader Asian context. Future research could include a more comprehensive
representation of Asian regions, encompassing Central Asia and other areas not covered in this study.
Although we did not specically examine gender and cultural/regional dierences in this study, our
ndings contribute to the existing literature by highlighting the general relationships between students’
self-concept, perceived parental expectations, perceptions of STEM professionals, career outcome
expectations, and their STEM career aspirations. However, we recognise the need to further investigate
the potential moderating role of gender and regions in these relationships. Future research could
explore how gender and regions interact with students’ self-concept, parental expectations, perceptions
of STEM professionals and career outcome expectations, and whether the observed relationships vary
across gender or regional groups. Additionally, the results only reect correlations between variables
instead of causal relationships. Future research could build on our ndings by conducting experimental
tests or longitudinal studies to investigate causality and student commitment. Moreover, many other
factors, such as school types, socioeconomic status, and expectations of teachers and peers, were not
included. Since in real life, study and career choices are inuenced by various factors in several spheres,
it would be important to integrate insights from dierent theoretical frameworks (e.g., Ajzen’s (1991)
theory of Planned Behaviour) to better understand the processes and mechanisms by which interest
and aspirations for STEM careers develop (van Tuijl & van der Molen, 2016).
Availability of data and materials
The datasets analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to the request made in
the consent forms issued to participants.
Disclosure statement
No potential conict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
Faculty of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, Education University of Hong Kong.
Notes on contributors
Chaoqun Lu is a research assistant professor at the University of Macau. She earned her PhD from the Education
University of Hong Kong in 2021. Her primary research interests lie at the intersection of science education (particularly
inquiry-based science teaching and learning) and language education (particularly translanguaging pedagogies in EMI
14 C. LU ET AL.

and CLIL classrooms). Chaoqun Lu’s diverse research interests also extend to areas such as STEM education, digital
literacy, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis.
Winnie Wing Mui So holds the position of Professional Advisor in the Department of Science and Environmental Studies
at The Education University of Hong Kong. As an esteemed professional in the eld, Prof. So’s primary research areas
encompass STEM education, inquiry-based learning in science and environmental education, and teacher development
in Science and General Studies.
Yu Chen is the Research Assistant Professor of Faculty of Education at University of Macau. Her research interests include
STEM education, Science and Environmental Education.
Antuni Wiyarsi currently works at the Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. Antuni does
research in Chemistry Education, Teacher Education, Vocational Education and Science Education.
Wing Kai Stephen Chiu is currently the Chair Professor of Sociology and currently the Associate Dean (International
Engagement) of Faculty of Liberal Arts and Social Science. Professor Chiu obtained his Bachelor and MPhil degrees at
The University of Hong Kong, and his Doctoral degree from Princeton University.
Yeonjoo Ko’s research centres on science learning from a sociocultural perspective to approach scientic issues (Socio-
scientic issues, SSI) and science learning with high-end technology in K-16 educational contexts. She has designed and
implemented educational programs by adopting instructional strategies and utilizing new technologies; investigated
student learning patterns and progression in knowledge and skills, competencies, and character.
Ying-Shao Hsu is a Chair Professor at the Graduate Institute of Science Education at National Taiwan Normal University
(NTNU). Her primary research interests include socio-scientic issues (SSI) learning, technology-infused science educa-
tion, curriculum design, metacognition, and STEM education. She specializes in developing SSI-based curricula and
investigating scaolds that improve students’ decision-making and metacognition in SSI contexts.
Hyunju Lee is a professor in the Department of Science Education at Ewha Womans University. She obtained her Ph.D.
degree from Curriculum & Instruction at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). She has been conducting
research on teaching socioscientic issues (SSI), especially development of SSI curriculum and programs, teacher
professional development for teaching SSI, and analysis of students’ informal reasoning on SSI.
Aik Ling Tan is an associate professor of science education with the Natural Sciences and Science Education department
at the National Institute of Education. Her current research interests lie in the areas of students’ ideas of science learning,
science teacher professional development and STEM education.
Siew Wei Tho works as an Associate Professor at the Department of Physics, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. He earned
PhD in the eld of science education at The Education University of Hong Kong. His research focuses mainly on
educational technology, technology-enhanced science learning, STEM education, laboratory-based learning via the
Internet, and open source-based data acquisition.
ORCID
Chaoqun Lu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0168-557X
Winnie Wing Mui So http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9649-074X
Antuni Wiyarsi http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5573-9345
Wing Kai Stephen Chiu http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0416-6297
Yeonjoo Ko http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2486-6875
Ying-Shao Hsu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1635-8213
Hyunju Lee http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4976-6544
Aik Ling Tan http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4627-4977
Siew Wei Tho http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3579-9433
References
Abe, E.N., & Chikoko, V. (2020). Exploring the factors that inuence the career decision of STEM students at a University
in South Africa. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00256-x
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Allison, P.D. (2003). Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4),
545–557. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.545
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 15

Archer, L., & DeWitt, J. (2016). Understanding young people’s science aspirations: How students form ideas about becoming
a scientist. Routledge.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-ecacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Signicance tests and goodness of t in the analysis of covariance structures.
Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E.M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-ecacy: How dierent are they really? Educational
Psychology Review, 15(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021302408382
Breiner, J.M., Harkness, S.S., Johnson, C.C., & Koehler, C.M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM
in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.
2011.00109.x
Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model t. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.), Testing
structural equation model (pp. 136–162). Sage.
Burušić, J., Šimunović, M., & Šakić, M. (2021). Technology-based activities at home and STEM school achievement: The
moderating eects of student gender and parental education. Research in Science & Technological Education, 39(1),
1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1646717
Chen, Y., Chiu, S.W.K., Zhu, J., & So, W.W.M. (2022). Maintaining secondary school students’ STEM career aspirations: The
role of perceived parental expectations, self-ecacy, and cultural capital. International Journal of Science Education,
44(3), 434–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2032463
Choy, M.W., & Yeung, A.S. (2022). Cognitive and aective academic self-concepts: Which predicts vocational education
students’ career choice? International Journal of Educational Research Open, 3, 100123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijedro.2022.100123
Chu, W.W., Mohd Haz, N.R., Mohamad, U.A., Ashamuddin, H., & Tho, S.W. (2022). A review of STEM education with the
support of visualizing its structure through the CiteSpace software. International Journal of Technology & Design
Education, 33(1), 39–61. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09728-3
Cozart, D.L., & Rojewski, J.W. (2015). Career aspirations and emotional adjustment of Chinese International graduate
students. SAGE Open, 5(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015621349
DeWitt, J., & Archer, L. (2015). Who aspires to a science career? A comparison of survey responses from primary and
secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13), 2170–2192. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09500693.2015.1071899
DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Archer, L., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). Young children’s aspirations in science: The
unequivocal, the uncertain and the unthinkable. International Journal of Science Education, 35(6), 1037–1063. https://
doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.608197
Du, X., & Wong, B. (2019). Science career aspiration and science capital in China and UK: A comparative study using PISA
data. International Journal of Science Education, 41(15), 2136–2155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1662135
Fouad, N.A., & Smith, P.L. (1996). A test of a social cognitive model for middle school students: Math and science. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 43(3), 338. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.43.3.338
Garriott, P.O., Hultgren, K.M., & Frazier, J. (2017). STEM stereotypes and high school students’ math/science career goals.
Journal of Career Assessment, 25(4), 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072716665825
Gottfredson, L.S. (2005). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 545–579. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.28.6.545
Gottfredson, L.S. (2005). Using Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise in career guidance and
counseling. In S.D. Brown & R.W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to
work (pp. 71–100). Wiley.
Hair, J.F. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education India.
Holmegaard, H.T., Madsen, L.M., & Ulriksen, L. (2014). To choose or not to choose science: Constructions of desirable
identities among young people considering a STEM higher education programme. International Journal of Science
Education, 36(2), 186–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.749362
Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cuto criteria for t indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus
new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10705519909540118
Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Scientic Software International.
Kang, J., & Keinonen, T. (2018). The eect of student-centered approaches on students’ interest and achievement in
science: Relevant topic-based, open and guided inquiry-based, and discussion-based approaches. Research in Science
Education, 48(4), 865–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9590-2
Kang, J., Keinonen, T., & Salonen, A. (2021). Role of interest and self-concept in predicting science aspirations: Gender
study. Research in Science Education, 51(S1), 513–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09905-w
Kitchen, J.A., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P.M. (2018). The impact of college- and university-run high school summer programs
on students’ end of high school STEM career aspirations. Science Education, 102(3), 529–547. https://doi.org/10.1002/
sce.21332
16 C. LU ET AL.

Kline, R. (2013). Exploratory and conrmatory factor analysis. In Y. Petscher, C. Schatschneider, & D.L. Compton (Eds.),
Applied quantitative analysis in education and the social sciences (pp. 171–207). Routledge.
Lent, R.W., & Brown, S.D. (2013). Social cognitive model of career self-management: Toward a unifying view of adaptive
career behavior across the life span. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(4), 557–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/
a0033446
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D., & Gore, P.A., Jr. (1997). Discriminant and predictive validity of academic self-concept, academic
self-ecacy, and mathematics-specic self-ecacy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(3), 307. https://doi.org/10.
1037/0022-0167.44.3.307
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. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.36
Lloyd, A., Gore, J., Holmes, K., Smith, M., & Fray, L. (2018). Parental inuences on those seeking a career in STEM: The
primacy of gender. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 10(2), 308–328.
Luo, T., So, W.W.M., Wan, Z.H., & Li, W.C. (2021). STEM stereotypes predict students’ STEM career interest via self-ecacy
and outcome expectations. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-
00295-y
Ma, Y., Siu, A., & Tse, W.S. (2018). The role of high parental expectations in adolescents’ academic performance and
depression in Hong Kong. Journal of Family Issues, 39(9), 2505–2522. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X18755194
Marsh, H.W., & Craven, R.G. (2006). Reciprocal eects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional
perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1
(2), 133–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00010.x
Marsh, H.W., Pekrun, R., Parker, P.D., Murayama, K., Guo, J., Dicke, T., & Arens, A.K. (2019). The murky distinction between
self-concept and self-ecacy: Beware of lurking jingle-jangle fallacies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(2), 331.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000281
Mau, W.C.J., & Li, J. (2018). Factors inuencing STEM career aspirations of underrepresented high school students. The
Career Development Quarterly, 66(3), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12146
McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coecient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412. https://doi.org/10.
1037/met0000144
Mihelich, J.A., Sarathchandra, D., Leonina, H., Storrs, D., & Wiest, M.M. (2016). Public understanding of science and K-12
STEM education outcomes: Eects of Idaho parents’ orientation toward science on students’ attitudes toward
science. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 36(3), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467616687217
Mukaka, M. (2012). A guide to appropriate use of correlation coecient in medical research. Malawi Medical Journal: The
Journal of Medical Association of Malawi, 24(3), 69–71.
Navarro, R.L., Flores, L.Y., & Worthington, R.L. (2007). Mexican American middle school students’ goal intentions in
mathematics and science: A test of social cognitive career theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 320–335.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.320
Nugent, G., Barker, B., Welch, G., Grandgenett, N., Wu, C., & Nelson, C. (2015). A model of factors contributing to STEM
learning and career orientation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(7), 1067–1088. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09500693.2015.1017863
Pedhazur, E.J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. Thompson Learning, Inc.
Podsako, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., & Podsako, N.P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and
recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annurev-psych-120710-100452
Sahin, A., Ekmekci, A., & Waxman, H.C. (2017). The relationships among high school STEM learning experiences,
expectations, and mathematics and science ecacy and the likelihood of majoring in STEM in college.
International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1549–1572. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1341067
Sahin, A., & Waxman, H.C. (2021). Collaborative assessment of collective reach and impact among INBRE supported
Summer undergraduate research programs across the United States. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations &
Research, 22(2), 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v20i3.1815
Sax, L.J., Kanny, M.A., Riggers-Piehl, T.A., Whang, H., & Paulson, L.N. (2015). “But I’m not good at math”: The changing
salience of mathematical self-concept in shaping women’s and men’s STEM aspirations. Research in Higher Education,
56(8), 813–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9375-x
Scholes, L., & Stahl, G. (2020). ‘I’m good at science but I don’t want to be a scientist’: Australian primary school student
stereotypes of science and scientists. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(9), 927–942. https://doi.org/10.
1080/13603116.2020.1751316
Schreiber, J.B., Nora, A., Stage, F.K., Barlow, E.A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and
conrmatory factor analysis results: A review. Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.
3200/JOER.99.6.323-338
Shavelson, R.J., Hubner, J.J., & Stanton, G.C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of
Educational Research, 46(3), 407–441. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543046003407
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 17

Šimunović, M., Reić Ercegovac, I., & Burušić, J. (2018). How important is it to my parents? Transmission of STEM academic
values: The role of parents’ values and practices and children’s perceptions of parental inuences. International
Journal of Science Education, 40(9), 977–995. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1460696
So, W.W.M., Chen, Y., & Chow, S.C.F. (2022). Primary school students’ interests in STEM careers: How conceptions of STEM
professionals and gender moderation inuence. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 32(1), 33–53.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09599-6
Tey, T.C.Y., Moses, P., & Cheah, P.K. (2020). Teacher, parental and friend inuences on STEM interest and career choice
intention. Issues in Educational Research, 30(4), 1558–1575.
Ursachi, G., Horodnic, I.A., & Zait, A. (2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect inuence
on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)
00123-9
van Tuijl, C., & van der Molen, J.H.W. (2016). Study choice and career development in STEM elds: An overview and
integration of the research. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 26(2), 159–183. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10798-015-9308-1
Watt, H.M.G., Hyde, J.S., Petersen, J., Morris, Z.A., Rozek, C.S., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2017). Mathematics - a critical lter for
stem-related career choices? A longitudinal examination among Australian and U.S. adolescents. Sex Roles, 77(3–4),
254–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0711-1
Woo, H., Heo, N., Jang, H., & Jang, Y. (2021). Parental and school factors on American high school students’ academic and
career intentions in STEM elds. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 23(1), 1–24. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10775-021-09498-9
Woong Lee, S., Min, S., & Mamerow, G. (2015). Pygmalion in the classroom and the home: Expectation’s role in the
pipeline to STEMM. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 117(9), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.
1177/016146811511700907
Yamamoto, Y., & Holloway, S.D. (2010). Parental expectations and children’s academic performance in sociocultural
context. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9121-z
Zeldin, A.L., Britner, S.L., & Pajares, F. (2008). A comparative study of the self‐ecacy beliefs of successful men and
women in mathematics, science, and technology careers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 1036–1058.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20195
18 C. LU ET AL.