Scholarlink

<p>The “leaky pipeline” is the oft-used metaphor to characterize the loss of STEM students in the progression from high school through college and into the labor force. This view of STEM education—which posits a unidirectional flow out of STEM fields—is both pervasive and influential in K-12, higher education, and workforce development policy. But there has been limited empirical support for this claim that “leaving STEM” is unidirectional and reduces the size of the STEM cohort. This study analyzes two cohorts in nationally representative, longitudinal surveys of four-year college students to examine freshman-to-bachelor’s degree pathways. We find that although a third of STEM-intending freshmen leave STEM fields and graduate in non-STEM majors, the size of the STEM graduating class is larger than the freshmen STEM class in the two cohorts of bachelor’s degree graduates. STEM graduates in both cohorts are comprised of large shares of students who did not initially declare a STEM major: just under 20% of graduates first began as non-STEM majors and were “late entrants” in STEM. Thus, rather than a leaky pipeline, STEM disciplines appear to be a two-way street, with many students attracted into STEM fields during college. The findings suggest that the dominant focus on STEM retention should be broadened to consider STEM “attraction” during college, since a large share of STEM graduates begin college as non-STEM and undeclared majors.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Reconceptualizing college STEM pathways: is “leaving STEM” the problem?

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月27日

查看全文
  • Hal Salzman,
  • Daniel Douglas,
  • Khudodod Khudododov

摘要

The “leaky pipeline” is the oft-used metaphor to characterize the loss of STEM students in the progression from high school through college and into the labor force. This view of STEM education—which posits a unidirectional flow out of STEM fields—is both pervasive and influential in K-12, higher education, and workforce development policy. But there has been limited empirical support for this claim that “leaving STEM” is unidirectional and reduces the size of the STEM cohort. This study analyzes two cohorts in nationally representative, longitudinal surveys of four-year college students to examine freshman-to-bachelor’s degree pathways. We find that although a third of STEM-intending freshmen leave STEM fields and graduate in non-STEM majors, the size of the STEM graduating class is larger than the freshmen STEM class in the two cohorts of bachelor’s degree graduates. STEM graduates in both cohorts are comprised of large shares of students who did not initially declare a STEM major: just under 20% of graduates first began as non-STEM majors and were “late entrants” in STEM. Thus, rather than a leaky pipeline, STEM disciplines appear to be a two-way street, with many students attracted into STEM fields during college. The findings suggest that the dominant focus on STEM retention should be broadened to consider STEM “attraction” during college, since a large share of STEM graduates begin college as non-STEM and undeclared majors.