Planning for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Retention: Understanding the Implications of the Theory of Planned Behavior
INTRODUCTION STEM PERSISTENCE IS A SPECIFIC CASE of general retention. General persistence theories attempt to explain retention for all students. STUDENT PERSISTENCE THEORIES Astin's (1984) Theory of Student Involvement identifies "inputs" such as demographics and the environment encompassing student experiences as important to general student retention. Tinto (1975) posits a sociological and interactional theory of student persistence that recognizes the importance of what students bring to the university in terms of personal characteristics, traits, experiences, and commitment coupled with their interactions at the institution. Specifically, Tinto emphasizes the degree to which the student integrated "fit" academically and socially. Tinto revisionists further link social integration (peer relationships) and academic integration (faculty member relationships) with persistence and emphasize the need for on campus community, such as on campus student housing and the opportunity to work with faculty advisors (Braxton 2000; Pascarella and Terenzini 1983) Terenzini and Reason (2005) and Reason (2009) suggest that the student's pre college characteristics and experiences meet with an organizational context consisting of internal structures, policies, and practices; academic curricular and cocurricular programs; and faculty culture. Within this structure, the student finds a peer environment featuring classroom experiences, out of class experiences, and curricular experiences that determines student persistence (Reason 2009; Terenzini and Reason 2005) STEM retention studies typically link student attributes and student engagement experiences to STEM persistence (Braunstein, McGrath, and Pescatrice 2000 01; Foltz, Gannon, and Kirschmann 2011; George et al. 2001; Hall, Curtin Soydan, and Canelas 2014; Higher Education Research Institute 2010; Reason 2009; Terenzini and Reason 2005; Tinto 1975) Student attributes include gender, race, socioeconomic status, high school curriculum, high school test scores, math ability, and high school class rank or grade point average (GPA) (Braunstein, McGrath, and Pescatrice 2000 01; Chan and Bauer 2014; Cooper and Pearson 2012; George et al. 2001; Higher Education Research Institute 2010; Lewis and Lewis 2007; Spencer 1996; Wagner, Sasser, and DiBiase 2002) Many of the STEM studies examine the importance of student relationships with peers and faculty members. Student engagement experiences for STEM students include hands on educational research, undergraduate research experiences, relationships with key faculty or advisors, and peer learning groups (Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University 1998; Christiansen 2014; Fakayode et al. 2014; Hunter, Laursen, and Seymour 2007; Laursen et al. 2010; Lopatto 2007; National Science Foundation 2008; Russell 2006; Vogt 2008) INTERACTIONAL/SOCIOLOGICAL PERSISTENCE RESEARCH The observational explanations, interactional theories, and subsequent interpretations provide institutions with a laundry list of options for connecting students with one another and with their campus; however, this research has yet to provide a prescriptive model for changing student behavior (Braxton, Hirschy, and McClendon 2004) Additionally, the theories do not provide psychological insight as to why some students "fit" and others do not successfully integrate into an identical environment even when they have similar academic backgrounds and socioeconomic demographics. THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) offers a model to predict, explain, and change human behavior. It suggests that behavior can be predicted by examining individual intentions to perform a specific behavior, such as departing college, and individual perceptions of control of the behavior (Ajzen 1988, 1991; Doll and Ajzen 1992) The TPB suggests that intentions are a strong predictor of behavior, since people typically do what they intend to do (Ajzen 1991)