Abstract
AbstractThis study aims to understand how students manage higher technical education and contribute to research on institutional culture, STEM education, and students’ educational strategies by identifying patterns of how students navigate within one university’s engineering education. To achieve this, we define and use the concept of technical science capital and habitus reconstruction. We collected data through a survey sent to engineering students who have followed an engineering program’s intended linear progression and those who have taken a ‘detour’ within the same cohort at one specific Swedish university. The survey had a high number of qualitative questions, including free text answers that captured students’ narratives. The results indicate that having a large amount of technical science capital alone is not enough for students to be successful in their studies. The university culture has its own structure, which can be intolerant. Within this culture, specific social skills and experiences are desirable, which provides students from a particular background with a greater opportunity for success. Despite possessing high technical science capital, students from other social groups or cultures face challenges. We discuss various measures that could make higher technical education more engaging. This study is limited to one Swedish university, and future studies could include a broader sample that represents several universities.
Funder
Royal Institute of Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Engineering,Education
Reference75 articles.
1. Abrahams, J. (2017). Honourable mobility or shameless entitlement? Habitus and graduate employment. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38, 625–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2015.1131145.
2. Archer, L. (2022). STEM Participation & Social Justice Research. Science capital. Retrieved from: STEM Participation & Social Justice Research | IOE - Faculty of Education and Society. - UCL – University College London.
3. Archer, L., Dawson, E., DeWitt, J., Seakins, A., & Wong, B. (2015). Science capital: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922–948. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21227.
4. Archer, L., Moote, J., MacLeod, E., Francis, B., & DeWitt, J. (2020). ASPIRES 2: Young people’s science and career aspirations, age 10–19. UCL Institute of Education.
5. Archer, L., Godec, S., Patel, U., Dawson, E., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2022a). : ‘It really has made me think’: Exploring how informal STEM learning practitioners developed critical reflective practice for social justice using the Equity Compass tool, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, https://DOI:0.1080/14681366.2022.2159504.