A recent study published in Learning and Individual Differences has shed light on how motivation impacts science achievement and career aspirations among students aged 11 to 14. Researchers found that the most successful and ambitious students tended to have a motivational profile marked by high expectations of success, a genuine interest in science, and a belief in its importance and utility. Additionally, these students perceived the “cost” of studying science—such as the effort involved—as low.
The researchers behind the new study aimed to address a critical issue: the declining interest in science during adolescence and its implications for educational and career choices. With a growing demand for workers skilled in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, understanding what drives students to pursue science is essential. Previous studies have highlighted the importance of motivation, but few have considered how multiple facets of motivation—such as the expectation of success, interest in science, and perceived costs—interact to influence achievement and aspirations.
“This is partly as I have an interest in the psychology of learning and what makes some young people thrive at school whereas others struggle. It is also partly inspired by my colleague Andrea Mallaburn who is a science educator and the importance of understanding why some young people continue to study science whereas others do not,” said study author David Putwain, a professor of education at Liverpool John Moores University and author of Understanding and Helping to Overcome Exam Anxiety.
The research involved 1,240 students aged 11 to 14 from six secondary schools in northwest England. The sample included a diverse range of students in terms of gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic background. Data collection occurred in two phases. In the first phase, students completed an online survey assessing their motivation to study science. This survey measured three key aspects: (1) their expectation of success in science tasks, (2) the value they placed on science (intrinsic enjoyment, importance, and utility), and (3) the perceived costs of studying science, including effort, opportunity costs, and social or emotional consequences.
Two weeks later, students participated in a 30-minute science test designed to assess their achievement. They also answered questions about their aspirations to pursue science-related careers. Using these data, researchers conducted a statistical analysis known as latent profile analysis to group students into distinct motivational profiles based on their responses.
The analysis revealed four distinct motivational profiles among the students:
High Value/Low Cost (Motivationally Adaptive): Students in this profile had the highest expectations of success, intrinsic enjoyment, and recognition of science’s importance and utility. They also perceived the costs of studying science as minimal. This group demonstrated the highest science achievement and career aspirations.
High Value/High Cost (Struggling Ambitious): These students valued science highly but also reported significant barriers, such as high effort and emotional costs. Their achievements and aspirations were moderately high but not as strong as those in the adaptive profile.
High Value/Medium Cost: This group showed high interest and recognition of science’s value but had lower expectations of success and higher perceived barriers. Their performance and aspirations were lower than the first two profiles but higher than the least motivated group.
Low Value/High Cost (Motivationally Disadvantaged): Students in this profile had low expectations of success, little intrinsic interest in science, and high perceived costs. They achieved the lowest test scores and expressed the weakest science-related aspirations.
“It was not necessarily the case that students who judged the importance of science to be high also judged the drawbacks of studying science to be low (and vice versa),” Putwain told PsyPost. “Some students judged the importance science and drawbacks of studying science to be high.”
The researchers also found that socioeconomic background and gender influenced motivational profiles. For example, students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds were less likely to belong to the adaptive profile and more likely to be in the disadvantaged or struggling profiles. Similarly, girls were overrepresented in the struggling profiles, which were characterized by high perceived costs, suggesting that societal pressures and expectations might play a role in shaping their experiences.
“Students’ beliefs about their ability, the importance of science, and the drawbacks associated with studying science (e.g., that requires a lot of effort) are critical in determining achievement and aspirations in early adolescence,” Putwain said. “In addition, girls and students and economically disadvantaged backgrounds tended to believe there were higher drawbacks in studying science, but did not judge their ability or the importance of science any differently to those from other backgrounds.”
While the study provides valuable insights, it has some limitations. The short timeframe between the measurement of motivation and the assessment of achievement limits the ability to draw long-term conclusions about how motivational profiles evolve and influence educational choices over time. Additionally, the study’s reliance on self-reported data for motivation introduces the possibility of bias, as students might overestimate or underestimate their feelings and perceptions.
Future research could address these limitations by tracking students over several years to understand how motivational factors interact with other influences, such as teacher support and peer relationships. Investigating how interventions tailored to different motivational profiles impact long-term outcomes would also be valuable. Finally, expanding the study to include more diverse educational settings could help determine whether the findings generalize beyond the specific context of secondary schools in England.
“We must bear in mind that the unique features of educational systems are likely to impact on the way science is perceived at school,” Putwain noted. “For instance, in this study, we focused on the first three years of secondary school where all students in English must study science before students can choose whether to study a specific science subject at a higher level in upper secondary education. Features of educational systems in different countries may impact students in different ways, but this does not reduce the importance of students beliefs in driving their achievement and aspirations.”
The long-term goal of this research is “to gain a more thorough understanding of the psychological drivers and barriers to student success in compulsory education,” Putwain explained. “This understanding is essential for teachers and school leaders to be efficient and effective in supporting student learning and achievement. There are also important messages for policy makers too. My goal is to assist policy makers, teachers, school leaders, and not least students themselves, to achieve their potential.”
The study, “Science motivation, academic achievement, career aspirations in early adolescents,” was authored by David W. Putwain, Andrea Mallaburn, and Tanja Held.
