Paper No. 259-6
Presentation Time: 9:00 AM-6:30 PM
UNDERSTANDING PATHS TO A GEOSCIENCE MAJOR: A CLOSER LOOK AT ACADEMIC PROVENANCE
FOREMAN, Elizabeth A.D., Geography and Geology, Eastern Michigan University, 900 Oakwood Dr, Ypsilanti, MI 48197 and RYKER, Katherine, Geography and Geology, Eastern Michigan University, 301W Mark Jefferson, Ypsilanti, MI 48197, eforema3@emich.edu
The geosciences are often considered a discovery major. Using a detailed interview protocol, Houlton (2010) identified three generalized descriptions of how students decide to major in the geosciences: natives (who decide to major in the geosciences at the time of, or prior to, college enrollment), immigrants (who were studying a different major and switched), and refugees (who major in the geosciences as a backup and do not intend on following a geoscience oriented career). In their 2014 survey, AGI found that the majority of graduates at the bachelor's and master's levels chose to major in the geosciences at some point during their undergraduate educations, citing different “intellectual draws to the field” (p. 10). This suggests that the “immigrant” pathway may be the most common of those identified by Houlton. However, it is unknown whether these three pathways constitute the most common routes to a major. An understanding of what pathways exist and how common they are can help target recruitment efforts and reduce a sense of isolation for those who took a less traditional path to the geosciences.
Based on a review of the literature on why people choose to major in different STEM fields, we have developed a focus group protocol to stimulate discussion of why geoscience students selected their major. These focus groups were conducted with self-identified geoscience majors at primarily undergraduate and research intensive universities. This process culminated in a series of statements that encompass common inspirations and obstacles to selecting a geoscience major. These include the influence of teachers, family and friends, economic factors, confirmation of abilities, and general attitudes towards the Earth and environment.
Following Q methodology, geoscience majors are given all of these statements and instructed to rank them from strongly agree to strongly disagree. A specialized sorting board forces a normalized distribution, prompting students to evaluate the strongest influences on their decision, rather than describe a large number as being generally important. A factor analysis can then be used to reveal common clusters of responses. This presentation will share preliminary findings from the focus groups and the Q sort, comparing them with the findings of Houlton (2010), AGI (2014) and others.
![[Visit Client Website]](/img/gsa/banner.jpg)