Scholarlink

Background <p>Understanding STEM identity as process oriented may clarify how students form commitments to STEM and how these processes shape motivation. This study examined three STEM identity development processes—commitment, in-depth exploration, and reconsideration—and tested how they relate to achievement motivation. Undergraduate students enrolled in engineering courses (<i>N</i> = 230) completed an adapted Utrecht-Management of Identity Commitments Scale (U-MICS) and achievement-value scales.</p> Results <p>Confirmatory factor analyses supported a 12-item, three-factor model; multiple indicators multiple causes modeling (MIMIC) analyses indicated that older students reported more exploration and less reconsideration, and women reported higher commitment. Structural models indicated that commitment and exploration were positively associated with intrinsic and combined attainment–utility value, whereas reconsideration was negatively associated with intrinsic and attainment–utility value and positively associated with cost.</p> Conclusion <p>Findings support a process-oriented view of STEM identity and demonstrate that identity processes differentially correspond to students’ motivational beliefs as they navigate early STEM pathways.</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

STEM identity development and achievement motivation: a psychometric analysis of the Utrecht-Management of identity commitments scale

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月20日

查看全文
  • Minh-Hao D. Tran,
  • Weihua Fan,
  • Diana De La Rosa-Pohl,
  • Allison Master,
  • Consuelo Arbona,
  • Norma Olvera

摘要

Background

Understanding STEM identity as process oriented may clarify how students form commitments to STEM and how these processes shape motivation. This study examined three STEM identity development processes—commitment, in-depth exploration, and reconsideration—and tested how they relate to achievement motivation. Undergraduate students enrolled in engineering courses (N = 230) completed an adapted Utrecht-Management of Identity Commitments Scale (U-MICS) and achievement-value scales.

Results

Confirmatory factor analyses supported a 12-item, three-factor model; multiple indicators multiple causes modeling (MIMIC) analyses indicated that older students reported more exploration and less reconsideration, and women reported higher commitment. Structural models indicated that commitment and exploration were positively associated with intrinsic and combined attainment–utility value, whereas reconsideration was negatively associated with intrinsic and attainment–utility value and positively associated with cost.

Conclusion

Findings support a process-oriented view of STEM identity and demonstrate that identity processes differentially correspond to students’ motivational beliefs as they navigate early STEM pathways.