Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 435

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why Do Students Choose Engineering? A Qualitative, Longitudinal Investigation of Students' Motivational Values

Matusovich, Holly M., Streveler, Ruth A., Miller, Ronald L.·2010·Journal of Engineering Education

Abstract

B ackground Recently published reports call for an increase in the number of engineering graduates and suggest appropriate characteristics that these graduates should embody. Accomplishing such change first requires understanding why students choose to pursue engineering degrees. P urpose (H ypothesis) Framed in motivation theory, our purpose was to better understand how students choose engineering by answering the question: How do engineering students' engineering‐related value beliefs contribute to their choices to engage and persist in earning engineering degrees? D esign/M ethod This research uses Eccles' expectancy‐value theory in a qualitative, longitudinal examination of undergraduate students' choices to enroll and persist in engineering majors. In particular, the focus of this work is Eccles' subjective task value (STV) construct, which incorporates the personal importance an individual assigns to engaging in an activity. Using a multiple case study method approach, participants included eleven students (five men and six women) at a U.S. technical school. R esults Results demonstrate that different patterns exist in the types of value or personal importance that participants assign to earning an engineering degree. Moreover, a primary differentiating feature of these patterns is whether or not participants choose engineering because it is consistent with their personal identity or sense of self. C onclusions We conclude that values are very important in students' choices to become engineers. To increase persistence rates we must focus on values, especially by helping students connect their personal identities to engineering identities.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01064.x

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 435

Metadata

Authors
Matusovich, H. M., Streveler, R. A., & Miller, R. L.
Venue
Journal of Engineering Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-10
Volume
99
Issue
4
Pages
289-303
ISSN
  • 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-9830
OpenAlex
W2010510558
Cited by
435
References
7
FWCI
28.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why Do Students Choose Engineering? A Qualitative, Longitudinal Investigation of Students' Motivational Values. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01064.x
The paper
Matusovich, H. M., Streveler, R. A., & Miller, R. L. (2010). Why Do Students Choose Engineering? A Qualitative, Longitudinal Investigation of Students' Motivational Values. Journal of Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01064.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.