The Impact of Science Capital on Self-Concept in Science: A Study of University Students in New Zealand

Abstract

Understanding factors that contribute to students' self-concept in science is an important task in boosting the number of students studying science and retaining students in science fields. A questionnaire was administered to science students at the University of Auckland in New Zealand (N = 693) to test a theoretical model of science self-concept tied to the work of Pierre Bourdieu. In this model, a student's social capital (i.e., relationships with parents, teachers and peers) and cultural capital (i.e., science related resources) are seen as key determinants of a student's belief that science is a domain in which they can succeed. Results from a Structural Equation Model (SEM) show that, of the factors included in the model, exposure to passionate science teachers during high school was the main predictor of science self-concept for our sample of university science students, while having peers who value science was also found to be important. Interestingly, science-related resources and parents' value of science were not significant predictors of science self-concept, but the number of university generations in the family did have a positive association. Students who self-identified as male had higher levels of science self-concept, even after accounting for social and cultural factors in our theoretical model. Implications of these findings are discussed in the context of the field of science education and Bourdieu's sociological theory.

Social class inequalities in attitudes towards mathematics and achievement in mathematics cross generations: a quantitative Bourdieusian analysis

“…In our data students' participation in cultural activities does not significantly affect achievement in mathematics and this suggests "cultural capital does affect educational outcomes, but in a limited way" (Dumais, 2002, p. 59). This finding is also consistent with a recent study in the related domain of science, which found that familial science capital had a small impact on science self-concept when compared to the larger effect of social class indicators (Turnbull et al, 2020). However, when habitus, which is operationalised as students' mathematicsrelated career aspirations, is added to the model after cultural capital, it showed a 2.3% increase of variance in GCSE achievement.…”

Re-Examining Inequalities in Computer Science Participation from a Bourdieusian Sociological Perspective

“…Bourdieu's theory of social and cultural reproduction has created a new coherent view of the sociology of education. His sociological framework is based on the sociology of power [32] and it is particularly useful for investigating how resources are allocated in society and how a person's internal dispositions are influenced by society's external structures [56]. His work on social reproduction has been widely employed in education research to investigate and understand the tenacity of stratified social patterns.…”

“…• objectified capital which refers to cultural goods like books, instruments, machines and it necessitates embodied capital to be fully valued [12]. • institutionalised capital which is a form of objectification e.g., formal qualifications Social capital refers to relationships between individuals that facilitate the growth of the other forms of capital [56]. Social capital inclines an investment in social relationships that would generate beneficial outcomes [46].…”

“…Capital is regarded as an interchangeable resource that can be used to "gain advantage in society" but its value is determined by the field that it's being used [56]. While the volume of capital may determine the ranking in the field, habitus determines the disposition toward the field [56].…”

“…In this field, individuals are classified by the capital they possess and that is the reason why researchers often use the concept of "market" to describe fields as it better emphasises the capital exchanges: individuals have diverse purchasing capital as well as different forms of capital which they can use to their advantage [9]. The nature of the field, therefore, is hierarchical [56] and an individual's classification within the field is determined by what is valued and valid in the field and thus, individuals with a high volume of valued capital will hold the highest rankings. Another construct that is used to describe fields is "game", as it better reflects the idea that fields are dominated by rules, and individuals are players which employ strategies -ways of playing the game -to win or maintain power and position themselves or being positioned in the hierarchy.…”