PUBLICACION Life Stories of Graduate Students in Chile and The United States Influences On Becoming A Scientist From Childhood To Adulthood

International Journal of Science Education
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20
Life stories of graduate students in Chile and the

United States: influences on becoming a scientist
from childhood to adulthood
Marta A. Silva Fernández, Waleska Berríos, Paulina Sanzana & Andrew L.

Sigerson
To cite this article: Marta A. Silva Fernández, Waleska Berríos, Paulina Sanzana & Andrew L.
Sigerson (2023): Life stories of graduate students in Chile and the United States: influences on
becoming a scientist from childhood to adulthood, International Journal of Science Education,
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2022.2161858
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2161858
Published online: 04 Apr 2023.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsed20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2161858
Life stories of graduate students in Chile and the United

States: influences on becoming a scientist from childhood to
adulthood
Marta A. Silva Fernández , Waleska Berríos , Paulina Sanzana and
Andrew L. Sigerson
Faculty of Philosophy and Humanities, Austral University of Chile, Valdivia, Chile
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The ways in which children and adolescents become interested in Received 27 June 2021
science have been well studied. However, little is known from a Accepted 20 December 2022
lifespan perspective about how this process continues from
KEYWORDS
childhood through adulthood. This cross-national study builds an Learning science; graduate
understanding of doctoral students in the sciences in the Chile students; life stories
and the United States and how they choose to pursue careers in
the life sciences from childhood to adulthood. Fifteen Chilean
and 15 U.S. doctoral students were interviewed using the life
story approach. The qualitative analysis indicates that the main
difference between the two groups when pursuing science across
their lifespans was their valuation of and experience with
different learning approaches, with ‘collectivist’ approaches being
more typical for the Chilean students and ‘individualist’
approaches for the U.S. students. On the other hand, the principal
similarities between the two groups were related to participants’
experiences and perceptions of science at each life stage: ‘playing
science’ as children, ‘studying science’ as adolescents, ‘doing
science’ as young adults and undergrads, and ‘labouring in
science’ and ‘practising science’ as professionals and doctoral
students. Implications for pedagogical practice and planning for
science teaching and teacher training are addressed.
Introduction
This study investigates factors influencing Chilean and U.S. graduate students’ choices to
become scientists from childhood through adulthood using the life story approach. Chile
and the United States offer a valuable comparison in this arena. Chile, on the one hand, is
considered a promising emerging economy by the OECD: it is one of several countries
that meet a series of standards related to stable and functional democratic governments,
successful market economies, and, among other factors, a strong emphasis on generating
a national science system (Geldes et al., 2017; OECD, 2021). Nevertheless, in October
2019, the country experienced a social outburst (referred to in Chile as the estallido
social) that called into question the country’s democratic principles and spotlighted
CONTACT Marta A. Fernández marta.silva@uach.cl Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades, Universidad Austral de

Chile, Isla Teja s/n, Valdivia, Los Ríos, Chile 5110597
© 2023 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 M. A. SILVA ET AL.
the consequences of a market economy that has resulted in increasing inequity while also
failing, despite the country’s overall economic success, to provide many of Chile’s citizens
with what they consider to be a dignified existence (Sehnbruch & Donoso, 2020). As a
direct result of the social outburst, which at its height saw over a million Chileans in
the streets protesting nationwide, a new constitution is currently being written (replacing
the dictatorship-era document from 1980) by elected committee-members in order to
establish new bases for the evolution of a more democratic and equitable country
(Gobierno de Chile, 2021). Among the objectives of the constitutional committee is
the strengthening and democratising of science, including the guarantee of decision-
making based on scientific evidence, which points to a corresponding need for increased
scientific literacy (‘Por el derecho a la ciencia’, 2021). The United States, on the other
hand, is one of the most powerful economies in the world, with a highly developed
science system that is notable not only in terms of research output but also accessibility
compared to the Chile of today. However, both countries aim to increase working
scientists in order to improve technological development and strengthen their econom-
ies. To accomplish this, both nations need more citizens socialised in science from child-
hood to young adulthood, and both would benefit from a heightened understanding of
this process.
Most studies on graduate students in science focus on their academic experiences or
self-efficacy. For example, Leon-Beck and Dodick (2012), when researching challenges
and coping strategies of ecology graduate students, found that when students accumulate
field experience and acquire necessary knowledge and skills, their motivation to pursue
graduate studies improves. Other studies focus on self-efficacy, for example Charleston
and Leon (2016), who examine self-efficacy beliefs and expectancy outcomes for
African-American graduate students using a trajectory approach. They report that
self-efficacy is a construct that must be continuously re-achieved alongside students’ pro-
gress towards advanced STEM degrees. These studies focus on specific aspects of gradu-
ate students’ experiences at the tertiary level; however, little is known about how graduate
students become socialised in science across their lifespans. Therefore, the research
question that guides this study is: How do doctoral students in the United States and
Chile become interested in pursuing science across their life stages, from childhood to
graduate school?
For this study 15 Chilean and 15 U.S. doctoral students were interviewed using the life
story approach to explore the ways in which children and adolescents become interested
in science from a lifespan perspective and how this process continues from childhood
through adulthood. In this regard, it is important to note certain key differences at
this juncture of the educational background of the interviewees and the education
systems of the two countries in question. In the United States, education is highly decen-
tralised (UNESCO, 2007) – especially in comparison to Chile – as individual states and
local governments are largely responsible for public education, which is attended by a
large majority of students. Federal, state, and local governments all fund K–12 education
at differing levels, and educational achievement, curriculum, and other key factors vary
across the country and within specific states and regions based on various local factors
that extend beyond family income, though it remains an important variable. In con-
temporary Chile, on the other hand, which is regarded as an extreme case of
market-based education, education is highly centralised and extremely segregated
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 3
(Valenzuela et al., 2014). Public K-12 schools receiving full state funding are considered,
in the great majority of cases, to be of low educational achievement, and are overwhel-
mingly attended by students from disadvantaged socioeconomic sectors. Fully private
schools, meanwhile, generally have high educational achievement, but are attended by
a small minority of students from higher socioeconomic sectors. In between, the
Chilean education system has also been characterised by subsidised, privately-owned
schools that receive state funding and operate on a family co-payment system and
whose enrolment is much higher than fully private schools. These schools vary greatly
in educational achievement and have been subject to scarce oversight, and though
they will be slowly phased out as a result of recent educational reforms, they have
played a key role in establishing the current educational landscape, in which access to
quality education is directly linked to economic resources. The consequences of this
system, typified by schools that are state-subsidised yet heavily exclude based on
family income, have been that only the upper-middle-class is facilitated in the reproduction
or growth of their social capital (Bourdieu, 1987; Cal et al., 2019). The majority of Chile’s
state-funded schools, whether fully public or subsidised-private, represent an extremely
inequitable distribution of social capital. In this sense, the current education system – follow-
ing a market-based model introduced during the military dictatorship of Chile and enshrined
in the 1980 Constitution along with later educational reforms following the return to democ-
racy in 1990 – has served only to increase social injustice, with the result that students from
working-class families and with greater educational needs receive less attention and are at
much higher risk of dropping out or being otherwise failed by the system.
Literature review
Socialisation in science is understood as the processes by which individuals become inter-
ested in pursuing a career in science from childhood to adulthood through formal and
informal education (Tierney & Rhoads, 1994). In this paper, interest in science is under-
stood as this broad aspirational motivation for pursuing science, rather than the psycho-
logical construct of interest or intrinsic motivation as defined by Renninger (2000). In
addition, this research explored cultural aspects involved when learning, science: the
individualistic and collectivistic approaches. As Hui and Triandis (1986) state, the indi-
vidualism-collectivism dimension has several operationalisations and conceptualisations.
Yet, in general terms, in this study these dimensions are define as it follows:
In individualist cultures, most people’s social behaviour is largely determined by personal
goals, attitudes, and values of collectivities (families, co-workers, fellow countrymen). In col-
lectivist cultures, most people’s social behaviour is largely determined by goals, attitudes, and
values that are shared with some collectivity (group of persons). (Hui & Triandis, 1986, p. 60).
Given these definitions, it is possible to apply them to the learning dimensions. Since par-
ticipating in any culture involves learning a ‘complex whole which includes knowledge,
belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits’ (Soar, 2017), the
way humans become part of any culture is by learning, a pivotal process that encom-
passes formal, informal, and nonformal learning (Blum, 2019). In this context, learning
science in a collectivistic way is conceptualised as a process by which there is a joint
intention and commit to a learning partnership. It involves discovering cooperatively
others who share a concern as a community (Peklaj & Vodopivec, 1999; Wenger, 2000).
It means to value and engage in different forms of direct participations such as conversa-
tions, reflections, activities, about science, etc. Then, learning science with an individua-
listic approach implies to value or emphasise the student’s goals that are beneficial for
them without emphasising learning as a collective endeavour (Johnson & Johnson, 2013).
When exploring how people become interested in pursuing science, the view of the
Nature of Science (VNOS) that people have impacts their decisions when following a
career. According to the Nation Science Teaching Association (NSTA) NOS is a critical
component of scientific literacy that enhances students’ understandings of science con-
cepts and enables them to make informed decisions about scientifically-based personal
and societal issues’ (Lederman, 1992). Usually, it is referred to characteristics of scientific
knowledge produced as a social enterprise that involves a diverse list of topics related to
sociology of science, philosophy and history of science such as: (1) tentativeness of scien-
tific knowledge; (2) nature of observation; (3) scientific methods; (4) hypotheses, laws,
and theories; (5) imagination; (6) validation of scientific knowledge; and (7) objectivity
and subjectivity in science. (Lederman & Abd-El-Khalick, 1998). Research on students’
views of NOS (VNOS) is extensive and it is considered pivotal when exploring students’
attitude towards science, which might impact their interest and motivation to learn
science. A sophisticated VNOS encompasses the seven characteristics above described.
On the contrary, a stereotyped VNOS includes features related to personal traits of scien-
tists (e. g. being males, ugly, crazy, unemotional, individualistic, and lonely), what they
wear (lab glasses) and how they do their job (working in a lab and performing dangerous
experiments) (Yacoubian, 2020). Even though this study did not include the exploration
of VNOS of graduate students across their lifespan, the results have implications on how
the interest and aspirations of the interviewees change over the time transitioning from
less to more sophisticated VNOS.
While some studies have focused on the experiences of graduate students in the
context of the challenges of their programmes, (Charleston & Leon, 2016; Corcelles
et al., 2019; Devos et al., 2017; Jung, 2018; Leon-Beck & Dodick, 2012), related research
has not been done from a lifespan perspective. To further understand the factors that
have influenced a graduate student to pursue a scientific career, it is necessary to inves-
tigate what influences individuals’ interest and activity in science at different life stages.
Here, we begin by reconstructing graduate students’ educational lifespans by reviewing
existing research that explores learning science at different stages.
Research on science education in formal schooling suggests that it is comparatively
easy to socialise and engage children at the primary level in scientific activities because
they have intrinsic curiosity about their surroundings (Andre et al., 2017; Guilherme
et al., 2016; Wilson, 2018). Several studies indicate that children tend to have positive atti-
tudes and performance in learning science in primary school (Ainley & Ainley, 2011;
Aktamiş et al., 2016; Hacieminoglu, 2016). However, it has been reported that when
entering secondary school, such positive attitudes decline (Wang et al., 2017).
Many studies concur that students who maintain interest in science during secondary
school feel positive overall about science, which is also related to enjoyment of science-
related activities outside of school, such as fixing computers or observing wildlife during
outdoor activities with friends and family (Ainley & Ainley, 2011; Chen et al., 2019). It
has been suggested that students with sustained interest in science at this stage tend to
identify with a romanticised, positivist view of science (e.g. science as an activity for intel-
ligent people who discover stable truths about the world). Indeed, research suggests that
this idealised view of science and self-confidence in one’s ability to understand it motiv-
ate students to enrol in science majors (Dorfman & Fortus, 2019; Ekmekci et al., 2019;
Lin et al., 2011; Oliver & Venville, 2011; Stiles-Clarke & MacLeod, 2017). Meanwhile,
other studies have found that many secondary students view science classes as too
focused on mathematical procedures, memorisation, and note-taking and as excessively
teacher-centred (Qian & Lehman, 2017; Sadler & Sonnert, 2016).
The personal factors influencing the decision to enrol in a science major include stu-
dents’ perception of the status of the profession, individual traits (e.g. self-efficacy in
science), and enjoyment of science, among others (Caspi et al., 2019; Niu, 2017;
Palmer et al., 2017; Sahin et al., 2017). Later, at the graduate level, it is known that under-
graduate research experiences and the guidance of advisors influence the decision to
advance (Eagan et al., 2013; Feldman et al., 2013; Gilmore et al., 2016).
Once enrolled in a graduate programme, it is unclear how students relate their self-
efficacy to their identity as a scientist. The literature suggests that they often experience
a significant change in the science they had been learning and doing during earlier stages;
for example, some realise that science is a gradual, uncertain endeavour (Kuzhabekova &
Temerbayeva, 2018; Rabbi & Canagarajah, 2017). When entering graduate school, stu-
dents are novices learning to practise real science, and it is here that being socialised
into a community of practising scientists becomes a salient factor (Corcelles et al.,
2019; Hopwood, 2010; Jung, 2018; Lave & Wenger, 1991). Nevertheless, current research
is polarised in this area, with some studies reporting positive experiences during this
process and others negative (Devos et al., 2017; Kuzhabekova & Temerbayeva, 2018).
Examples of negative feelings at this stage include anxiety and self-doubt; lack of inde-
pendence in developing one’s own research; and the sensation of exploitation of
student labour (Adamuti-Trache & Andres, 2008; Delamont, 2000; Gardner, 2008;
Hoying et al., 2020; Voltmer et al., 2019).
In sum, the literature points to different manners in which students become interested
in science from primary through graduate school. As illustrated, these studies examine
different life stages separately and emphasise formal schooling; they do not describe
the full process of becoming interested in science across a person’s lifespan or focus holi-
stically on both formal and informal contexts across different stages. This study addresses
this research problem by interviewing 15 doctoral students in the life sciences from Chile
and 15 from the United States and exploring how they have experienced science from
childhood to adulthood in both formal and informal contexts.
Methodology
Thirty doctoral students from highly ranked research universities in southern California
and southern Chile (15 from each country) were interviewed individually for approxi-
mately two hours by the main researcher, who is bilingual, using the life story approach
(Atkinson, 2002). The sample was purposive, and the criteria were volunteer participants
enrolled beyond the first year of their doctoral programmes in the life sciences. We con-
tacted potential interviewees by email with permission from each university, utilising
their student lists. Participants were between 26 and 47 years old, and most had attended
state-funded K-12 schools. Ten males and five females were interviewed in Chile and
eight males and seven females in the United States.
Life story interviews were used to explore the participants’ lifespans, which allowed us
to understand the evolution of their experiences in science across different life stages
based on their own perspectives, feelings, and memories (Atkinson, 2007). The interview
protocol included descriptive and structural questions, with five main sections corre-
sponding to the following five life stages: primary, secondary, undergraduate, post-
graduation, and graduate studies.
In the data analysis, each interview was first read iteratively and summarised. The 30
interviews were coded using HyperResearch, which allowed full coding of each using pre-
elaborated broad domains according to different life stages in formal and informal edu-
cational settings; emerging codes complemented the set of broad domains. Both sets of
codes were continuously compared to find patterns and themes across data in order to
later identify relationships between the domains.
To ensure the quality of the data analysis and ascertain the biases that could be present
due to the fact that the data collection was conducted by a single researcher whilst herself
completing doctoral studies, two credibility strategies were used: Prolonged Engagement
in the Field or Research Site and Peer Debriefing (Anney, 2014). The former calls for the
lead researcher to reach a state of immersion in the world of the interviewees. In the case
of this study, the 30 interviews were conducted with doctoral students by another doc-
toral student, often touching on main themes shared between interviewer and intervie-
wee such as relationships with advisors, the stages of transition from undergraduate to
graduate studies, and the like. In this sense, immersion in the participants’ world was
achieved, and the lead researcher’s simultaneous experience of being a doctoral
student facilitated the trust of the participants and in turn provided the researcher
with a greater understanding of their culture (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2007). The strategy
of Peer Debriefing, meanwhile, entails seeking support from other researchers in terms of
academic and investigative orientation, which in this case was constituted by the main
researcher’s lead advisor and dissertation committee members, who assessed the full
research process in order to optimise the quality of the data analysis and results. The
research was also approved by the human subjects committee of the Institutional
Review Board of the lead researcher’s doctoral university.
Participants and their contexts

The participants from the Seven Lakes University (Chile) and West Coast University
(United States) – both pseudonyms – were all enrolled in doctoral programmes. Most
of them were in their third or fourth year or recently graduated, and some were in
their second year but with their master of science degree completed. The U.S. intervie-
wees were younger than the Chilean students on average: the average age for the
Chilean students was 32, with the oldest being 47 and the youngest 28, whereas the
average age for the U.S. students was 26, with the oldest being 37 and the youngest 24.
The fields of study of the two sets of participants were almost entirely within the life
sciences, though one U.S. student’s research topic fell within the physical sciences. We
included him in our sample because he identified his work with the life sciences due
to its application to healthcare. Most of the Chilean informants completed their
undergraduate degrees at Seven Lakes University, and all of them were studying their
graduate programmes in the same university, a private research institution that receives
a large portion its funding from the state (this is a unique arrangement in Chile and is
unrelated to the K-12 educational scenario discussed above); it is one of the so-called ‘tra-
ditional universities’ in Chile, a group of primarily state-funded institutions that are
regarded as the nation’s best, and it ranks among the top 10 Chilean universities accord-
ing to Times Higher Education (2021). As for the U.S. students, 11 completed their
undergraduate programmes in public universities and 4 in private universities, which
in terms of general perceptions of educational quality do not differ from each other in
any categorical manner like they do in Chile. All of the U.S. students attended graduate
school at West Coast University, a public land-grant research university that is part of a
lager university system ranked among the top 30 in the United States.
The majority of U.S. interviewees hailed from urban or suburban middle-class back-
grounds and asked for student loans, received scholarships, or were helped by parents or
relatives to pay undergraduate tuition and fees. In Chile, the majority of interviewees
came from urban emerging middle-class families and represented the first generation
to have completed an undergraduate degree; most paid for their undergraduate degree
with loans. Most of the U.S. informants had at least one parent with an undergraduate
degree, whereas among the Chilean participants only four had at least one parent with
an undergraduate degree and at least five of them had their undergraduate incomplete.
In terms of informal education, meanwhile, we can refer to studies that have been con-
ducted within the framework of cultural consumption, which is understood as access on
the part of the Chilean population in this case to theatre, visual arts, museums, libraries,
dance, music festivals, and the like. In relation to museum visits, for example, in a study
carried out in Chile, a sample selected from the general public was asked if they had
visited a museum during the past 12 months, and 20.5% had. The study reported this
figure as a relatively high result in the regional context, since it was above average com-
pared with other South American countries such as Colombia (12.3%) or Argentina
(11%); however, it is also below the average attendance rate recorded in developed
nations including England (52.5%), Spain (33.2%), and France (30%) (Observatorio de
Políticas Culturales, 2019). This likely represents an important data point in terms of
the present study and others like it, as Peters (2021), in his analysis of relevant demo-
graphic variables, has found that a radical differentiation continues to exist in the
Chilean context between those with a high level of cultural consumption and those
with a low level. More specifically, a clear relationship can be observed between patterns
of cultural consumption and tastes and class membership: a strong inequality exists, in
this case, between Chileans who partake in cultural-artistic activities in terms of the econ-
omic and educational (cultural) capital they possess (Bennett et al., 2009).
Results
In this section, participants’ lifespans in science are presented as they narrated the experi-
ences that led them to pursue science during their childhood, adolescence, early adulthood,
and professional lives. The analysis focuses on the principal factors that influenced partici-
pants’ evolving interest in science across the various stages. Despite noteworthy differ-
ences, trajectories were structurally similar for Chilean and U.S. participants.
Childhood: playing science

Both groups of participants recalled being active children inquisitive about nature and
how the world works, highlighting activities they participated in at home or school.
Lucía1, a Chilean student, provided the example of cooking with her mother:
I don’t know if that is science, but I was next to her but not interested in the actual cooking,
but rather in mixing stuff because that’s how I used to do ‘experiments’ (laughing), I used to
do them like the ones on TV when someone has something and mixes it with something
else, and little bubbles come up.
U.S. students, meanwhile, tended to focus their narratives more on independent activi-
ties. Joe, for example, remembered that he used to watch educational programming
including Sesame Street, ‘and afterwards there were other TV shows like Mr. Wizard’.
He was also fond of building toys, and although ‘it wasn’t necessarily scientific’, he main-
tained that the ‘scientific method’, as he indicated, was involved. He explained:
Understanding how to put something together and how to create something, there was a bit
of an engineering aspect to it, too. And just the idea of thinking critically of how to put these
puzzles together, I think, was something I really loved.
Nevertheless, the analysis of interview data suggests that informal education at home
influenced interest in science more for the Chilean participants, while formal education
had a stronger influence on the U.S. students. At home, Chilean students reported that
they were encouraged by their families to learn about various science-related topics
through everyday conversation with relatives. Gaspar, for example, had frequent conver-
sations with his father about topics including ecology and the cosmos.
On the contrary, U.S. students described developing interest in science in formal schooling
environments and to a lesser degree at home, where there was a clear focus on activities carried
out independently. Most recalled science activities at school, where classes were more activity-
based – including hands-on demonstrations and fieldwork – than what their Chilean counter-
parts reported. Mariah remembered visiting a NASA centre, where she and her classmates
tried freeze-dried ice cream and spun in the multi-axis trainer previously used to train astro-
nauts. She also recalled a typical activity in which the teacher gave students a sheet to record
observations of a burning peanut to determine how many calories it contained.
A notable trend in the responses was that most U.S. participants were drawn to science
because of the intellectual challenge of solving problems independently. Fiona described
how her math class had weekly competitions where the teacher would post a problem.
Everyone with the correct solution, she recalled, would get a prize. Fiona was aware
that she was skilled in math at this point:
I really liked having new challenges to do, and I actually got it every week, I was able to solve
the problems, so that was I guess when I figured out that I might have a future doing some-
thing in the natural sciences, like something that would use mathematics to solve problems,
like that kind of thinking. So yeah, I would say elementary school was the start.
Formal education had a strong influence on U.S. students’ interest in science, and classes
were focused on students’ capabilities, with activities that fostered self-confidence by
challenging them intellectually to solve problems. Science in the formal educational
realm also included engaging activities such as fieldtrips and extra-curricular clubs.
Despite the differences between Chilean and U.S. participants’ memories of informal
versus formal learning, a larger common theme emerged as both groups focused on
recollections of having fun and enjoying science activities during their time as primary
students. What they described constituted ‘playing science’. Marco, a Chilean participant,
illustrated this salient aspect of early interest and experimentation with the natural world,
recounting the following:
[My brothers and I] used to play, for example, to make a kind of ‘drink’ from flowers, […]
we kind of smashed some, and because of their colours, we liked to make ‘drinks’ of different
colours depending on the […] flower, so we used to make different combinations.
Meanwhile, Tyler, a US participant who was encouraged by his teacher to compete in

math games, recalled quite a different context – tied to formal education – but the
aspect of play was likewise strongly present as a motivating factor. He remembered
hearing his teacher and others speak of his enthusiastic participation in the
competitions:
I was really competitive, and so I remember we’d have math game competitions in elemen-
tary and middle school where you […] hold up flashcards, it will say like 5 × 3, and the first
one to give an answer […] moves on, and I remember doing really well at those games and it
was really fun for me to be able to beat these other kids.
Despite the fact that formal schooling appeared more influential for U.S. participants
and informal education for Chilean participants, both groups had crucial first-hand
experiences with scientific thinking, inquiry, and activity both at home and at school.
In either sphere, they tended to perceive this as play, often in activity-based learning
environments or free experimentation, rather than compulsory learning. Thus, we
have designated this stage as ‘playing science’, where science is perceived as a fun activity
or game rather than an area of formal study, whether within or outside the school
environment. The most significant difference between the two groups was that
‘playing science’ tended to be developed collectively for the Chilean students, while the
U.S. students tended to recall more individualistic examples; the former clearly valued
doing or playing science with others, peers or family, while the latter were more apt to
enjoy science on their own or else in situations in which individual success was an impor-
tant motivation.
Adolescence: studying science

Both groups of interviewees reported cultivating their interest in science during second-
ary school and having much to study and memorise, indicating that science classes were
generally difficult, but interesting. A key difference was that the majority of Chilean par-
ticipants considered their science teachers and classmates influential in stimulating their
desire to pursue science further, while U.S. students tended to value and find encourage-
ment through personal achievements. These were likewise associated with activities in
the formal educational environment, but less so with specific instructors, mentors, or
peers. In terms of informal education, as opposed to the earlier stage, participants
from neither group reported informal activities as influential during adolescence, indicat-
ing the heightened importance of the school. For example, Camilo, a Chilean student,
remembered the following:
[In biology class] everything was more interesting because the teacher came in and started
the class saying, ‘You are the biologists’, meaning that he started from the basis that we were
all a working group of peers because ‘we understand each other in a different way’, he would
tell us.
By contrast, many U.S. participants felt that science classes in secondary school fostered
their individual self-confidence and abilities, which they described in the context of a
more flexible curriculum. They could take Advancement Placement (AP) and honours
classes in specific areas of their interest, differing from the more rigid curricular tracks
that typify the Chilean secondary school. For example, Fiona took AP chemistry,
which was challenging and fast-paced with high volumes of content and memorisation.
Her success despite these difficulties helped her develop self-confidence as she mastered
‘a lot of math, acid–base stuff and chemical reactions, balancing equations’.
Most Chilean participants spent their secondary school years with the same cohort in
science class because they did not have the option to choose among different subjects.
Marco referred to a difficult biology class, which as for Fiona in the United States,
stood out in his memory as a key challenge during this stage:
Everybody suffered a lot with science in general, but biology was the most difficult, and I
chose [that track]. And my grades went up (laughing), so, of course, here [at school] my
interest in science kind of awoke, so I told myself, ‘Ok, I just have to figure these things
out’ […] When I see certain challenges, something difficult, I just go for it, but when I
see easy things, I don’t get motivated at all.
Chilean students’ self-confidence and abilities in science were likewise enhanced by per-
forming well, but nearly always as participants in a community, in reference to their
friends and peers; they were socialised in science through a more collective process.
Above, Marco refers to the particularly difficult biology course as a collective challenge,
conjuring his peer group’s fearful perception of the class as a backdrop for his own
experience. Importantly, in the Chilean school system, this peer group would have all
chosen a scientific track for secondary school and spent much of the day together in a
pre-determined series of courses with little or no flexibility. Conversely, U.S. students
tended highlight their self-efficacy more straightforwardly, recalling being skilled at
science as individuals on educational paths they had made active and nuanced choices
about. Many selected AP or honours classes in a variety of subjects, which meant they
interacted with a wider range of peers. Many U.S. participants felt ‘brainy’ when
taking these high-level classes, but often remembered having friends from other
classes whom they could help using their own talents and interests, as recounted by Erin:
Really none of my friends were really involved in science […] but you know, I still liked
being that person that was able to help them with their homework and their activities
and be able to answer the questions […] I liked being that person, I was able to teach
others to because I really like science, and I know a lot of my friends thought it was horrible
and it was hard and they didn’t like it at all, so I tried to make it interesting for them too.
As in the childhood stage, the data suggests that the U.S. and Chilean students were socia-
lised in science through more individual or collective processes, respectively, which could
relate to the curriculums and school structures through which they passed: the Chilean
students spent all or most of secondary school with them same group of peers who had
chosen a specific scientific track, while the U.S. students, in a more flexible educational
system, developed self-efficacy through more personalised skill development and efforts,
even when peer interactions were involved. Meanwhile, both groups reported having
endured difficult classes that involved learning and memorising large amounts of scien-
tific content. In this sense, and in contrast to the childhood stage, all perceived that they
were ‘studying science’ as adolescents in secondary school. Many also claimed that they
were not ‘doing science’, but rather learning key contents and principles of science.
Undergraduate years: studying and doing science

To enter university, Chilean students had to choose a school and programme based on
national test scores, which served as the main criterion for admission to higher edu-
cation. As in secondary school, they had a relatively non-flexible curriculum from
freshman year onward, and they spent much of their time with the same cohort of
classmates. Conversely, U.S. participants spoke of flexibility, with some not choosing
an undergraduate major until their third year; some also recalled the freedom to
change programmes if they had not made the right choice, a process that remains
difficult in Chile.
In both Chile and the United States, the majority of participants reported having par-
ticularly interesting classes in the later years of their undergraduate programmes that
were more closely related to their chosen fields, while the first couple years covered
more basic topics in science and sometimes other subjects, offering little experience of
actually doing science. Students had to memorise information, much like secondary
school, and had heavy workloads. Laboratory sections encouraged achieving correct
results on quizzes or lab work (which some described as simply following a recipe), as
opposed to designing experiments with open-ended possibilities. Towards third year,
in most cases, classes became more interesting and interactive, and participants high-
lighted a social dynamic turning more explicitly towards academic work. In this
regard, Juan, a Chilean student, expressed the following:
In my third year the practical part began, which was fun, and in my fourth year I had more
specialised classes. In those, you had more chances for discussing academic papers or
current research with your classmates, it was more about presenting projects; it was more
discussion-based, more interactive.
Classes became smaller and more personalised as well, and many participants reported
that laboratory classes were more interesting because they could conduct experiments
independently and attain desired or interesting results without following pre-determined
steps designed to arrive at certain outcomes. U.S. and Chilean students had generally
similar experiences with science during this stage, corresponding to a similar time
frame within their undergraduate programmes.
However, some U.S. participants began having engaging experiences in the laboratory
earlier than the Chilean students, mainly through optional opportunities. Several U.S.
participants volunteered for lab work during their second year, while all of the
Chilean participants began laboratory work later in their programmes, generally once
they had begun their undergraduate theses. Alisa, a U.S. student, recounted her early
undergraduate experience by emphasising the individual project she was able to carry
out through one-to-one interaction with the lead investigator in her lab, highlighting
the importance of this researcher and others as mentors:
The principal investigator in the lab who I worked with just was very supportive and
encouraging. I did my own independent research project and there were
the grad student and the post-doc in the lab who listened to my ideas and talked to me about
how to analyse the data and were really, really helpful. Very encouraging, supportive.
Though Alisa’s example stands out in terms of her early and fruitful lab work and men-
torship, most participants, both Chilean and U.S. students, were socialised in ‘doing
science’ at a later point in their undergraduate programmes. This refers to a point at
which they began to perform science independently, and with less emphasis on curricular
contents or memorisation. A distinct trend that continued at this stage, however, was that
Chilean students valued, or at least experienced, a collective approach to learning, while
U.S. students had more individualised learning and interaction. The strong cohort nature
of many Chilean academic programmes, coupled with increased opportunities for some
U.S. participants to begin independent lab work early (and greater curricular flexibility in
general), could have contributed to this difference equally or more than personal learning
preferences. In any case, the data indicates a marked trend in which Chilean participants
reported learning in a more collective manner while U.S. participants completed their
undergraduate studies with a more individualistic approach, including their relationships
and interactions with their peers.
Transition to work experience: labouring in science

Following graduation, the decision to enrol in graduate studies was natural for both
groups of participants. They had enjoyed their work in science as undergraduates,
despite formidable challenges in many cases, and believed they could advance in their
fields. Many participants from both Chile and the United States gained work experience
prior graduate school, mainly in private sector laboratories, but their experiences varied.
For example, Andrew, a U.S. participant, enjoyed working in industry, but he recalled
that his boss assumed that he would continue his studies, which influenced his plans.
His boss noted his talent would ask him, ‘What are you going to do? You should go
to grad or med school’, which increased his self-confidence and interest in pursuing
those options.
On the contrary, the Chilean participants who entered the work force had uniformly
negative experiences. As Gustavo explained, ‘In my job as a blood sample analyst, I did
not do science at all’. He recalled a tedious and unchallenging work environment. Gaspar,
meanwhile, recounted, ‘My job was not a place for growing personally or professionally’.
The Chilean interviewees perceived the professional work following their undergraduate
programmes as unpleasant experiences in which, although they were doing science in
some sense, it was different from what they had enjoyed in earlier activities, courses,
or projects.
Despite the wide range of experiences, the data indicates that this period had a unify-
ing characteristic of ‘labouring in science’ for the majority of participants. Though there
were moments of growth and encouragement for some, there was a pervasive sense com-
municated by all interviewees who worked during this stage that they were not engaged
in real science. Importantly, though, this was when they made or finalised decisions to
attend graduate school.
Graduate school: practising science and learning as a researcher

Both groups of interviewees perceived that it was during the life stage of graduate studies
that they began to ‘practise science’, which refers to the fact that they worked more inde-
pendently and constructed knowledge in an authentic laboratory setting, as opposed to
merely working in a lab. They reported having more ownership of their research projects,
and most were able to mentor less experienced students while simultaneously being men-
tored by their own advisors. However, the experience of ‘practising science’ in labora-
tories was different for the Chilean and U.S. interviewees. Many Chilean participants
felt that their laboratories, professors, classmates, and mentorees constituted a genuine
research community, while the U.S. students tended to perceive their graduate labora-
tories likewise as job settings, though ones in which, importantly, they could develop
skills within the field and pursue research interests.
Pilar, a Chilean student, claimed that during her graduate studies, the lab members
were very social, fostering a strong group dynamic:
In my lab there are the doctoral students’ offices, a lounge, the professors’ offices, and
between those offices you can see the labs, so most of my classmates and research group
members can be found there, especially in the students’ association meeting room, so
there is like an ongoing dynamic. We celebrate birthdays; the group of people is very
nice people; you get out of your office to have a talk, we often have a cup of coffee, so
then the day goes fast, it is really nice. It is not like going to an office and being bored all day.
Meanwhile, the majority of the U.S. students perceived their laboratory work more like a
traditional job, often describing the division of labour as a key aspect of the social climate
like in a company, where each member is charge of a specific task. Barbara, for example,
saw her graduate work as a well-defined, though highly demanding, split between labora-
tory work and serving as a teaching assistant. ‘It’s a job’, she explained. ‘I mean, we get
paid. You come in on the weekends. You work around the clock. It’s continuous’. In line
with this perception of graduate-level work, there was a tendency among U.S. intervie-
wees to view figuring things out individually as a more efficient way of solving problems
with experiments. Several reported frustrations with ‘everyday failure’ in the laboratory,
as one student termed it, leading to negative emotions at the individual level and a
general lack of motivation. John, a U.S. student, explained this sensation in the following
manner, emphasising the personal burden he felt during his research activities:
What can be painful is that, it takes […] multiple days, or even months, or even years, to
solve a problem. And often I will go home, feeling like a total failure at the end of the
day because I have made no progress on a problem.
Importantly, most Chilean participants devoted themselves fully to their research pro-
jects because they had scholarships from the Chilean government or university fellow-
ships. Alejandro, devoting himself full-time to his research, expressed that he
considered what he did in his laboratory to be very serious, but at the same time enter-
taining and rewarding, giving an impression of personal dedication to both his research
and his laboratory community:
I have so much fun doing my work, but it is serious. What I mean is that this job is not like
being a slave; I like it a lot. Also, I like the freedom that I have here because I do things that I
consider important for the lab.
As exemplified by Alejandro’s words, what the Chilean students tended to value most
during this stage was the interaction, collaboration, and problem-solving they engaged in
within their research groups. They enjoyed figuring things out, practising science, together.
Meanwhile, a salient factor during this stage for the majority of U.S. participants –
despite feelings of frustration, demotivation, or personal burden related to problems
with experiments – was a growing appreciation of uncertainty and error as a source of
knowledge-building, including among peers. John explained this as follows:
And, of course, if you have an idea but you are not confident about it, you have to explain it
to another person, and even if that person does not understand anything of what you are
saying, it is the mental exercise of organising that idea.
In line with perceptions of addressing genuine research problems, pursuing personal

scientific interests, and above all practising ‘real science’, as Josh and Alejandro stated,
this stage has been termed ‘practising science’. This refers to the fact that students par-
ticipated in a more active science in which skilled researchers discuss ideas, figure out
problems, develop personal skills within the field, and above all, have freedom to
pursue research interests and projects, whether in a more individualist or collectivist
lab setting. This latter factor represented the most obvious difference observed
between the two groups at this stage: when participating as active researchers in their
labs, most Chilean students reported and valued a noteworthy group dynamic, a collec-
tive approach to learning, while the majority of U.S. students placed greater value on the
personal growth and skills they were able to develop in graduate school, conveying an
individual approach to learning.
In sum, despite clear differences between the Chilean and U.S. students at various life
stages, the analysis of interviewees’ perceptions of science throughout their lives pointed
to a clear progression with notable commonalities, which have been labelled as (a)
‘playing science’, for Chilean students more often at home and for U.S. students fre-
quently at school; (b) ‘studying science’ during secondary school and the early under-
graduate years, which took place primarily in formal educational environments for
both groups; (c) ‘doing science’ when conducting undergraduate research, especially as
upperclassmen, for both groups; (d) ‘labouring in science’ during job placements follow-
ing undergraduate programmes and preceding graduate studies, which the majority of
both groups experienced; and lastly (e) ‘practising science’ in doctoral programmes.
This progression is illustrated below in Figure 1. The primary difference, overall, was
in learning approaches, which have been broadly labelled as ‘collectivist’ for Chilean stu-
dents and ‘individualist’ for U.S. students. Further discussion of these concepts is devel-
oped in the following section.
Figure 1. Perceptions of science at different life stages/educational levels.

Discussion
Firstly, the results support the idea that it is relatively easy to engage children in scientific
activities at the primary level because they have an intrinsic curiosity about their sur-
rounding environments and phenomena (Andre et al., 2017; Guilherme et al., 2016;
Wilson, 2018). Moreover, analysis of the Chilean narratives supports previous findings
on fostering interest and involvement in science through activities with parents and rela-
tives during childhood, including cooking, going to museums, reading, and talking about
science and the natural world (Strickler-Eppard et al., 2019). In the case of the partici-
pants in this study, such activities helped develop their love for knowledge, inquiry,
and study, and an appreciation for science in general. Some authors suggest that the
earlier children are exposed to science, the more likely they are to become scientifically
literate and interested in learning science at higher levels (McClure et al., 2017; National
Research Council, 2010).
For the U.S participants, the importance of formal education was noteworthy, but it was
primarily described in relation to meaningful experiences and relationships with teachers
and sometimes peers. Math and science classes were influential for these students, as
they remembered actively participating in their learning process in these subjects and
feeling encouraged by their own success. Their teachers also fostered their self-efficacy in
science by encouraging them to participate in class and extracurricular science activities.
To a lesser degree, the science activities and subject matter they were exposed to at home
influenced their early and growing interest in science. For the Chilean students, by contrast,
primary education was not considered as important as activities outside of school, at home
or elsewhere. Formal and informal education were both perceived as influential, then, but a
clear emphasis on one or the other stood out across both groups’ respective narratives. Like-
wise, a marked difference was present in the learning approach experienced at this stage: for
Chilean participants, it was collective, while for the US participants, it was far more individ-
ual, a trend that continued throughout the following life stages.
It has been claimed that secondary school science education diminishes students’
interest in science (Ainley & Ainley, 2011; Cheung, 2018; Darlington, 2017). However,
this analysis suggests that both groups of students maintained their interest in science
from primary to secondary education. In fact, because of having the chance to choose
a science track, in the case of the Chilean students, or advanced classes in different
STEM disciplines, in the case of the U.S. students, most participants experienced second-
ary school as an opportunity to study their scientific interests in greater depth to the
degree possible, and despite an increasingly challenging academic climate. The Chilean
students’ enduring interest seemed enhanced by participating with a close cohort of
peers studying the same science track on a daily basis. Meanwhile, the U.S. participants’
interest in science was enhanced by the possibility of a more personalised learning plan
and individual success, allowing for significant development of knowledge and self-confi-
dence in their fields of interest and related activities.
For both Chilean and U.S. participants, then, the findings indicate that what main-
tained students’ interest in science through secondary school was a combination of
two factors: motivation in the formal educational environment, including from science
teachers for the U.S. group and peers in the Chilean group, and being able to make aca-
demic choices that allowed them to study science in greater depth. This combination of
factors led the students discover and reaffirm their enjoyment and abilities in science,
though in a new and more study-oriented context, supporting findings related to the
development of self-efficacy in science (Ainley & Ainley, 2011; Dorfman & Fortus,
2019; Oliver & Venville, 2011). In the case of the U.S. participants, extracurricular
science activities and fieldtrips provided by schools were also pivotal for cultivating inter-
est, which could contradict studies that point to a loss of interest in science correspond-
ing with secondary or early undergraduate science activities (Ainley & Ainley, 2011;
Anderhag et al., 2016; Swarat et al., 2012).
Following secondary school, the principal reasons participants chose to enrol in
undergraduate science programmes partially support other findings in the literature,
which suggest that influential factors include a positive perception of science and scien-
tists, personal traits including self-efficacy in science, and enjoyment of doing science
(Hinds & Shultz, 2018; Niu, 2017). Both groups of interviewees acknowledged that
having a strong sense of being skilled in science was crucial for deciding to pursue it
at the university level.
The first two years of undergraduate study, approximately, were reported as less enga-
ging by the majority of interviewees because of the large emphasis on memorisation and
obtaining correct answers about generalised scientific topics. These findings align with
other studies that illustrate how curriculum is often decontextualised from the inquiry
that working scientists engage in, which students claimed was notably lacking in labora-
tory sections designed with predetermined procedures and answers.
The greatest influence to continue pursuing scientific careers following their under-
graduate programmes was the research experience they had as upperclassmen, which
was likewise a period when classes were smaller and they could interact more meaning-
fully with professors and peers. After graduating, for those who had professional experi-
ence in the private sector, the experience of working in a laboratory and interacting with
others in the field was also an important factor in deciding to go to graduate school for
some, though for others it was tedious and discouraging. Especially in the case of the
Chilean participants, many felt disappointed with the monotonous and unengaging
scientific work they had to perform during this stage. For the U.S. students, the job
experience was more often perceived as positive, as they were more likely to encounter
like-minded peers and mentors. This, combined with the fact that many considered
graduate research to be a job as well, though a rewarding one, may have made their inter-
mediary work experience feel more like a natural step towards graduate study. Despite
any difficulties at this stage, both groups of participants maintained their interest in
studying science beyond the undergraduate level due to a strong and continuing sense
of being skilled at science and a remaining, somewhat idealised view of science as an
intriguing, high-status field populated by ‘smart or brainy’ people. Gradually, especially
once many began working, both groups began to understand science with greater
nuance, with the sometimes-necessary drudgery of lab work bridging their play and
study of a romanticised science at earlier levels with the actual practice of science at
the doctoral level. In most cases, students were buoyed by their enduring interest and
sense of self-efficacy during this stage, despite frequent unhappiness with work life.
The experiences of participants in graduate school were centred on the work and
learning dynamics in their laboratories, which was far more likely to be associated
with an active community of practice in the case of the Chilean participants (Lave &
Wenger, 1991). U.S. students, meanwhile, were more likely to perceive their graduate
work as a job placement that did not differ substantially from a private sector post,
where they had to produce reports and findings in a somewhat regimented manner com-
pared to the more collaborative and exploratory research described by the Chilean gradu-
ate students. These differing perceptions align to some degree with previous studies on
the socialisation of graduate students, which appear polarised between those reporting
positive, engaging experiences (Corcelles et al., 2019; Jung, 2018) and others describing
negative experiences of disillusionment with graduate labour (Devos et al., 2017). It is
worth noting, however, that several U.S. interviewees reported satisfaction with their
graduate-level work, despite seeing it firmly as a job as opposed to an idealised climate
of scientific discovery.
In the case of both groups, graduate school was when participants were trained as
active, doctoral-level researchers. The ‘socialisation in science’ that occurred at this
crucial stage, though in differing research climates, points to how the participants in
this study – as in earlier life stages – were engaged with and motivated to learn science.
Though it occurred in varying forms, overall these results strongly support the position
that successful students in the sciences need to actively participate as members of a scien-
tific community and be supported and guided by peers and more expert members, ideally
beginning well before their careers as researchers, during childhood and adolescence
(Collins et al., 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991). In the case of these students, both groups
saw their views of science evolve through several stages, from ‘playing science’ to ‘practis-
ing science’. Thus, this study supports previous findings on students’ perception of science
evolving as an increasingly sophisticated understanding (Weinberg et al., 2018).
Consequently, this study makes two main contributions to the literature, the first of
which is the key difference observed in the general approaches to learning science
reported by the Chilean and U.S. groups, respectively. Across the data and life stages
identified, Chilean students demonstrated a tendency to be familiar with and favour a
‘collectivist approach’ to learning science, meaning that their participation and growth
in an active community of learners and practitioners, from childhood through adult-
hood, was highly significant (Wenger, 2000). The U.S. informants perceived learning
science as a more personalised process, representing an ‘individualist approach’
focused on the internal process of learning and placing greater emphasis on the student’s
own abilities and more selective peer-to-peer interaction (Jhonson & Jhonson, 2013), as
opposed to sustained community and collaboration (Peklaj & Vodopivec, 1999). This
difference could be cultural, in part, as Chilean society places comparatively higher
value on collectivism, while the United States holds individualism as more important
(Kizilcec & Cohen, 2017). As Triandis et al. (1986) point out, in individualistic cultures,
‘most people’s social behaviour is largely determined by personal goals, attitudes, and
values of collectivities’, as opposed to collectivist cultures where ‘most people’s social
behaviour is largely determined by goals, attitudes, and values that are shared with
some collectivity (group of persons)’ (p.60). Indeed, Kostelijk et al. (2017) explicitly
define Chile as a collectivistic culture, which means it is one ‘in which people from
birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, or in extended families
(with uncles, aunts and grandparents) (p. 40). These general cultural tendencies
closely correspond to the approaches through which the respective groups of intervie-
wees learned and participated in science through the graduate level.
Apart from the above findings, the results of this study also provide a set of concepts to
describe the nature and influences of students’ interest in science across their life stages:
‘playing science’, ‘studying science’, ‘doing science’, ‘labouring in science’, and ‘practising
science’. Each concept/stage effectively encompasses the views, experiences, and
impressions that the majority of participants from each group reported when narrating
their experiences with science, despite extensive differences between the U.S. and Chilean
groups, as well as those present within the narratives of students from the same culture.
This widely applicable framework could be useful in working to engage more students in
the sciences and increase the number of working scientists in a particular region, allow-
ing for the influence of local differences and particularities yet illustrating a comprehen-
sible trajectory of learning science that may be similar across many cultures.
Returning to the framework of individualistic and collectivistic approaches in science
teaching and learning, certain implications can be established in terms of the encourage-
ment offered by secondary schools and universities for students to continue studying and
remain oriented towards the sciences. Teachers could develop a deeper cultural under-
standing of both approaches in question, for example, in order to shape science activities,
particularly in the process of scaffolding (Brown et al., 2003). For example, some of the
scaffolding activities could be ‘think alouds’ which allow students to model their thoughts
as they solve a problem, read a text, or design a project, first individually, then collec-
tively; or asking students to share their own experiences or ideas with the class about
a concept to study and have them relate to their own lives.
Considering that culture shapes individuals and science is a particular type of culture
(Franklin, 1995), teachers could aim to gradually socialise students in both types of
approach. This could be reflected at the curricular level; for example, in Chilean secondary
schools, aspects of an individualistic approach to the sciences could be socialised, with
personal achievements being valued apart from collective achievements – and with the
understanding that it would not be desirable, however, for a student socialised primarily
in said approach to enter university believing that science is chiefly a personal endeavour,
given that scientific study and labour entails a great deal of collaborative work, which stu-
dents in this study found to be especially obvious during the dissertation stages. It follows,
likewise, that students from more individualistic cultures, such as the United States, could
be socialised in collectivist approaches during the process of science teaching and learn-
ing. In this context, giving certain emphasis to an individualistic approach as well will also
be beneficial, given that the personal qualities of each student are not always highlighted in
the attainment of collective achievements. Allowing both types of approach to comp-
lement one another in secondary and higher educational settings alike, with the prevailing
cultural tendency of the setting in which students are studying as a base, could provide a
more authentic image and experience of what it means to work as a scientist, and therefore
it could result in more students becoming interested in science, dedicating themselves to a
scientific field, and continuing in that field through higher educational levels.
An additional important point suggested by our results is the lack of processes of
negotiation in contemporary educational trajectories in the sciences, especially in later
stages. This corresponds to the fact that interests and aspirations might change consider-
ably over time, with informants’ responses as graduate students differing from the way
they would have viewed and discussed their educational choices during primary and sec-
ondary school or earlier stages of university study. As Holmegaard et al. (2014) posit, the
transition between secondary school and undergraduate study in particular entails a

negotiation of identities on the part of students in order to arrive at a sense of belonging
in the practice of science at the university level. What students have expected from uni-
versity during earlier stages does not necessarily match what they find there. For example,
some courses in the curriculum might not have the wanted effect on students’ aspirations
and motivations to pursue science, and it is often necessary for them to negotiate their
identities in order to make sense of their continuing journey in the sciences (Wenger,
2000). This evolving and perhaps more sophisticated VNOS (Yacoubion, 2020)
however, may not be present as strongly at the graduate level, given that, having more
experience in the sciences at this stage, students may hold more sophisticated –
yet also more rigid – VNOS based on their longer trajectory in a chosen field at that
point and a higher level of self-assurance. In this scenario, it would be preferable for cur-
riculums in the sciences, especially in higher education (undergraduate and graduate
levels), to include course work in epistemology, philosophy, and history of science, or
courses in the sciences that incorporate aspects of NOS (see, for example, Gardner,
2017; Wheeler et al., 2019), especially since many graduate students will become scholars
themselves, teaching future fledgling scientists and reproducing the VNOS that they have
developed in turn. However, it must be acknowledged that more research needs to be
done to gauge whether students learning about VNOS explicitly in these classes could
develop more sophisticated views.
As a final point, it is worth noting the limitations of this study, which are mainly
centred on the relationship between the experiences reported in terms of social class
and gender and how these factors impacted participants’ careers in the sciences across
their life stages. The analysis conducted was not focused on social class, though it
stood out as a factor for the Chilean students in particular, most of whom were first-gen-
eration university students, (most of the U.S. students, on the other hand, were second-
generation students), which shows how Chilean universities have been transitioning
through the years from elite institutions to organisations that promote social mobility
(Labraña & Vanderstraeten, 2020). In this regard, for example, being a first-generation
student might also have benefits when pursuing science, for example, because they are
talented students, they might receive more attention from teachers for excelling in
science. It would be useful to inquire further on how social class impacts the differing
experiences of today’s students in the sciences across their life stages to acquire a
greater sense of students’ needs – for example, in the context of the present study, a com-
parison of how science classes are experienced at different socioeconomic levels in Chile
(public versus private schools), and further, how these differ from the experiences of
students at comparable levels and establishments in the United States. In this manner,
differences could be explored in the dimensions of equity, diversity and social justice
in science education (Rodriguez & Morrison, 2019). Meanwhile, another limitation is
related to gender perspectives, which were not included as a focus of this study. It is
widely recognised that gender can be a decisive factor in science education when choos-
ing, for example, to continue studying in a given field (e.g. Amon, 2017; Makarova et al.,
2019). In this context, it could be illuminating to understand how woman interviewees in
a study such as this one viewed science across various educational levels and how they, as
successful cases of women dedicated professionally to science, experienced and dealt with
possible barriers in their careers.
Note
1. All participant names are pseudonyms.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was funded by the Programme for Strengthening Initial Teacher Training (Programa de
Fortalecimiento de la Formación Inicial Docente) of the Chilean Ministry of Education and ANID –
Millennium Science Initiative Program – NCS2021_081.
ORCID
Marta A. Silva Fernández http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8323-3314
Waleska Berríos http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5951-7739
Paulina Sanzana http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7609-606X
Andrew L. Sigerson http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3857-7214
References
Adamuti-Trache, M., & Andres, L. (2008). Embarking on and persisting in scientific fields of study:
Cultural capital, gender, and curriculum along the science pipeline. International Journal of
Science Education, 30(12), 1557–1584. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701324208
Ainley, M., & Ainley, J. (2011). Student engagement with science in early adolescence: The con-
tribution of enjoyment to students’ continuing interest in learning about science.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.
08.001
Aktamiş, H., Hiğde, E., & Özden, B. (2016). Effects of the inquiry-based learning method on stu-
dents’ achievement, science process skills and attitudes towards science: A meta-analysis
science. Journal of Turkish Science Education (TUSED), 13(4). https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.
10183a
Amon, M. J. (2017). Looking through the glass ceiling: A qualitative study of STEM women’s
career narratives. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 236. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00236
Anderhag, P., Wickman, P. O., Bergqvist, K., Jakobson, B., Hamza, K. M., & Säljö, R. (2016). Why
do secondary school students lose their interest in science? Or does it never emerge? A possible
and overlooked explanation. Science Education, 100(5), 791–813. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.
21231
Andre, L., Durksen, T., & Volman, M. L. (2017). Museums as avenues of learning for children: A
decade of research. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 47–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10984-016-9222-9
Anney, V. N. (2014). Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative research: Looking at trust-
worthiness criteria. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 5(2),
272–281. http://jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.com/abstractview.php?id19
Atkinson, R. (2002). The life story interview. In J. F. Gubrium, & J. S. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of
interview research: Context and method (pp. 121–140). Sage Publishing.
Atkinson, R. (2007). The life story interview as a bridge in narrative inquiry.
In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp.
224–245). Sage Publishing.
Bennett, T., Savage, M., Silva, E., Warde, A., Gayo, M., & Wright, D. (2009). Culture, class, distinc-
tion. Routledge.
Blum, S. D. (2019). Why don’t anthropologists care about learning (or education or school)? An
immodest proposal for an integrative anthropology of learning whose time has finally come.
American Anthropologist, 121(3), 641–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13268
Bourdieu, P. (1987). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University
Press.
Brown, J. S., Heath, C., & Pea, R. (2003). Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context.
Cambridge University Press.
Cal, M. G., Cabrol, G. O., & Méndez, M. L. (2019). Elección escolar y selección de familias:
Reproducción de la clase media alta en Santiago de Chile. Revista Internacional de Sociología,
77(1), e120. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2019.77.1.17.310
Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., Nitzani-Hendel, R., Zacharia, Z., Rosenfeld, S., Berman, S., & Shildhouse, B.
(2019). Ninth-grade students’ perceptions of the factors that led them to major in high school
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. Science Education, 103(5), 1176–
1205. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21524
Charleston, L., & Leon, R. (2016). Constructing self-efficacy in STEM graduate education. Journal
for Multicultural Education, 10(2), 152–166. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-12-2015-0048
Chen, C., Jeckel, S., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2019). ‘Cowboy’ and ‘cowgirl’ programming and
success in college computer science. International Journal of Computer Science Education in
Schools, 2(4), 22–40. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v2i4.34
Cheung, D. (2018). The key factors affecting students’ individual interest in school science lessons.
International Journal of Science Education, 40(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.
1362711
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of
reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnik, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Knowing, learning and
instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–493). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Corcelles, M., Cano, M., Liesa, E., González-Ocampo, G., & Castelló, M. (2019). Positive and nega-
tive experiences related to doctoral study conditions. Higher Education Research &
Development, 38(5), 922–939. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1602596
Darlington, H. M. (2017). Understanding and developing student interest in science: An investi-
gation of 14-16-year-old students in England [Doctoral dissertation, University College
London]. UCL Discovery.
Delamont, S. (2000). The doctoral experience: Success and failure in graduate school. Falmer.
Devos, C., Boudrenghien, G., Van der Linden, N., Azzi, A., Frenay, M., Galand, B., & Klein, O.
(2017). Doctoral students’ experiences leading to completion or attrition: A matter of sense,
progress and distress. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32(1), 61–77. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10212-016-0290-0
Dorfman, B. S., & Fortus, D. (2019). Students’ self-efficacy for science in different school systems.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(8), 1037–1059. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21542
Eagan, M. K., Jr., Hurtado, S., Chang, M. J., Garcia, G. A., Herrera, F. A., & Garibay, J. C. (2013).
Making a difference in science education: The impact of undergraduate research programs.
American Educational Research Journal, 50(4), 683-713. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213482038
Ekmekci, A., Sahin, A., & Waxman, H. (2019). Factors affecting students’ STEM choice and per-
sistence: A synthesis of research and findings from the second year of a longitudinal high school
STEM tracking study. In A. Sahin, & M. J. Mohr-Schroeder (Eds.), STEM education 2.0 (pp.
279–304). Brill Sense.
Feldman, A., Divoll, K. A., & Rogan-Klyve, A. (2013). Becoming researchers: The participation of
undergraduate and graduate students in scientific research groups. Science Education, 97(2),
218–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21051
Franklin, S. (1995). Science as culture, cultures of science. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24(1),
163–184. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.001115
Gardner, M. A. (2017). Developing connections between integrated laboratory practices and first-
year undergraduate nature of science (NOS) understanding. International Journal of
Environmental and Science Education, 12(5), 1299–1315. http://www.ijese.net/makale/1898.

html
Gardner, S. K. (2008). Fitting the mould of graduate school: A qualitative study of socialization in
doctoral education. Innovative Higher Education, 33(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10755-008-9068-x
Geldes, C., Felzensztein, C., & Palacios-Fenech, J. (2017). Technological and non-technological
innovations, performance and propensity to innovate across industries: The case of an emerging
economy. Industrial Marketing Management, 61, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.
2016.10.010
Gilmore, J., Vieyra, M., Timmerman, B., Feldon, D., & Maher, M. (2016). The relationship between
undergraduate research participation and subsequent research performance of early career
STEM graduate students. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(6), 834–863. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00221546.2015.11777386
Gobierno de Chile. (2021). Proceso constituyente. https://www.gob.cl/procesoconstituyente/
Guilherme, E., Faria, C., & Boaventura, D. (2016). Exploring marine ecosystems with elementary
school Portuguese children: Inquiry-based project activities focused on ‘real-life’ contexts.
Education 3-13, 44(6), 715–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2015.1007884
Hacieminoglu, E. (2016). Elementary school students’ attitude toward science and related vari-
ables. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(2), 35–52. https://
doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2016.288a
Hinds, E. M., & Shultz, G. V. (2018). Investigation of the factors that influence undergraduate
student chemistry course selection. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(6), 913–919. https://
doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00833
Holmegaard, H. T., Madsen, L. M., & Ulriksen, L. (2014). A journey of negotiation and belonging:
Understanding students’ transitions to science and engineering in higher education. Cultural
Studies of Science Education, 9(3), 755–786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9542-3
Hopwood, N. (2010). A sociocultural view of doctoral students’ relationships and agency. Studies
in Continuing Education, 32(2), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2010.487482
Hoying, J., Melnyk, B. M., Hutson, E., & Tan, A. (2020). Prevalence and correlates of
depression, anxiety, stress, healthy beliefs, and lifestyle behaviors in first-year graduate health
sciences students. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 17(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.
1111/wvn.12415
Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1986). Individualism-collectivism: A study of cross-cultural
researchers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17(2), 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022002186017002006
Jhonson & Jhonson. (2013). The impact of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning
environments on achievement. In J. Hattie, & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to
student achievement (pp. 372–374). Routledge.
Jung, J. (2018). Learning experience and perceived competencies of doctoral students in Hong Kong.
Asia Pacific Education Review, 19(2), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9530-0
Kizilcec, R. F., & Cohen, G. L. (2017). Eight-minute self-regulation intervention raises educational
attainment at scale in individualist but not collectivist cultures. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 114(17), 4348–4353. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611898114
Kostelijk, E. J., Alsem, K. J., & Ali, S. (2017). The influence of cross-cultural differences on consumer
values: A case study. Marklinq Publication, 12, 71. Hanze University of Applied Sciences.
https://research.hanze.nl/nl/publications/the-influence-of-cross-cultural-differences-on-consu
mer-values-a-
Kuzhabekova, A., & Temerbayeva, A. (2018). The role of conferences in doctoral student sociali-
zation. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 9(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/
SGPE-D-18-00012
Labraña, J., & Vanderstraeten, R. (2020). Functional differentiation and university expansion in
Chile. HSE-Social and Education History, 9(3), 252–277. https://doi.org/10.17583/hse.2020.4565
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge
University Press.
Lederman, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote
understandings of the nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in
science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 82–126). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of
the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tea.3660290404
Leon-Beck, M., & Dodick, J. (2012). Exposing the challenges and coping strategies of field-ecology
graduate students. International Journal of Science Education, 34(16), 2455–2481. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500693.2012.713145
Lin, H., Hong, Z.-R., & Huang, T.-C. (2011). The role of emotional factors in building public scien-
tific literacy and engagement with science. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 25–
42. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.551430
Makarova, E., Aeschlimann, B., & Herzog, W. (2019). The gender gap in STEM fields: The impact
of the gender stereotype of math and science on secondary students’ career aspirations. In
Frontiers in Education, 4, 60. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00060
McClure, E. R., Guernsey, L., Clements, D. H., Bales, S. N., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., &
Levine, M. H. (2017). STEM starts early: Grounding science, technology, engineering, and
math education in early childhood. The J. Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. https://
files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED574402.pdf
National Research Council. (2010). Surrounded by science: Learning science in informal environ-
ments. National Academies Press.
Niu, L. (2017). Family socioeconomic status and choice of STEM major in college: An analysis of a
national sample. College Student Journal, 51(2), 298–312. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/
A503260900/AONE?u=anon~386c0464&sid=googleScholar&xid=ea4a60c0
Observatorio de Políticas Culturales. (2019). Situación de los museos en Chile, Diagnóstico 2019.
Ministerio de las Artes, la Cultura y el Patrimonio. https://www.museoschile.gob.cl/sites/
www.museoschile.gob.cl/files/images/articles-90843_archivo_01.pdf
OECD. (2021). OECD Economic Outlook, Issue 2: Preliminary Version. https://www.oecd.org/
economy/chile-economic-snapshot/
Oliver, M., & Venville, G. (2011). An exploratory case study of Olympiad students’ attitudes
towards and passion for science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(16), 2295–
2322. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.550654
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Validity and qualitative research: An Oxymoron?
Quality and Quantity, 41(2), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9000-3
Palmer, T. A., Burke, P. F., & Aubusson, P. (2017). Why school students choose and reject science:
A study of the factors that students consider when selecting subjects. International Journal of
Science Education, 39(6), 645–662. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1299949
Peklaj, C., & Vodopivec, B. (1999). Effects of cooperative versus individualistic learning on cogni-
tive, affective, metacognitive and social processes in students. European Journal of Psychology of
Education, 14(3), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173120
Peters, T. (2021). Institucionalización y consumo cultural: Continuidades y transformaciones de
las lógicas de acceso a las artes en Chile (2003-2017). Atenea (Concepción), 523(523), 77–94.
https://doi.org/10.29393/AtAt523-411TPIC10411
Por el derecho a la ciencia: Cristina Dorador ingresa propuesta de norma constitucional que garantiza la
toma de decisión en base a evidencia científica. (17 de diciembre 2021). El Mostrador. https://www.
elmostrador.cl/dia/2021/12/17/por-el-derecho-a-la-ciencia-cristina-dorador-ingresa-propuesta-de-
norma-constitucional-que-garantiza-la-toma-de-decision-en-base-a-evidencia-cientifica/
Qian, Y., & Lehman, J. (2017). Students’ misconceptions and other difficulties in introductory pro-
gramming: A literature review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 18(1), 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3077618
Rabbi, S., & Canagarajah, A. S. (2017). Socialization in the neoliberal academy of STEM scholars: A
case study of negotiating dispositions in an international graduate student in entomology.
Humanities, 6(2), 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/h6020039
Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motiv-
ation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (pp. 373–
404). Academic Press.
Rodriguez, A. J., & Morrison, D. (2019). Expanding and enacting transformative meanings of
equity, diversity and social justice in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education,
14(2), 265–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09938-7
Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2016). Understanding misconceptions: Teaching and learning in
middle school physical science. American Educator, 40(1), 26–32. https://files.eric.ed.gov/
fulltext/EJ1094278.pdf
Sahin, A., Ekmekci, A., & Waxman, H. C. (2017). The relationships among high school STEM
learning experiences, expectations, and mathematics and science efficacy and the likelihood
of majoring in STEM in college. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1549–
1572. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1341067
Sehnbruch, K., & Donoso, S. (2020). Social protests in Chile: Inequalities and other inconvenient
truths about Latin America’s poster child. Global Labour Journal, 11(1), 52–58. http://
repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/174899 https://doi.org/10.15173/glj.v11i1.4217
Soar, K. (2017). Edward Tylor, archaeologist? The archaeological foundations of ‘Mr Tylor’s
Science’. In P. Tremlett, L. T. Sutherland, & G. Harvey (Eds.), Edward Burnett Tylor, religion
and culture (pp. 141–162). Bloomsbury Collections. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350003446.
ch-008
Stiles-Clarke, L., & MacLeod, K. (2017). Choosing to major in physics, or not: Factors affecting
undergraduate decision making. European Journal of Physics Education, 7(1), 1–12. http://eu-
journal.org/index.php/EJPE/article/view/48
Strickler-Eppard, L., Czerniak, C. M., & Kaderavek, J. (2019). Families’ capacity to engage in scien-
tific inquiry at home through structured activities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(6),
653–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00958-0
Swarat, S., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W. (2012) Activity matters: Understanding student interest in
school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 515–537. https://doi.org/10.
1002/tea.21010
Tierney, W. G., & Rhoads, R. A. (1994). Faculty socialization as cultural process; A mirror of insti-
tutional commitment. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 93-6). Washington, DC: The
George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Times Higher Education. (2021). World University Rankings 2021. https://www.timeshighere
ducation.com/world-university-rankings/2021/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/ran
k/sort_order/asc/cols/stats
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Betancourt, H., Bond, M., Leung, K., Brenes, A., Georgas, J., Hui, C.
H., Marin, G., Setiadi, B., Sinha, J. B. P., Verma, J., Spangenberg, J., Touzard, H., & de
Montmollin, G. (1986). The measurement of the etic aspects of individualism and collectivism
across cultures. Australian Journal of Psychology, 38(3), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00049538608259013
UNESCO. (2007). World Data on Education: The United States. http://www.ibe.unesco.org/sites/
default/files/United_States_of_America.pdf
Valenzuela, J. P., Bellei, C., & Ríos, D. D. L. (2014). Socioeconomic school segregation in a market-
oriented educational system: The case of Chile. Journal of Education Policy, 29(2), 217–241.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2013.806995
Voltmer, E., Obst, K., & Kötter, T. (2019). Study-related behavior patterns of medical students
compared to students of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM): A three-
year longitudinal study. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 262. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-
019-1696-6
Wang, M. T., Chow, A., Degol, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2017). Does everyone’s motivational beliefs
about physical science decline in secondary school?: Heterogeneity of adolescents’ achievement
motivation trajectories in physics and chemistry. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(8), 1821–
1838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0620-1
Weinberg, A. E., Trott, C. D., & Sample-McMeeking, L. B. (2018). Who produces knowledge?
Transforming undergraduate students’ views of science through participatory action research.
Science Education, 102(6), 1155–1175. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21453
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–
246. https://doi.org/10.1177/135050840072002
Wheeler, L. B., Mulvey, B. K., Maeng, J. L., Librea-Carden, M. R., & Bell, R. L. (2019). Teaching the
teacher: Exploring STEM graduate students’ nature of science conceptions in a teaching
methods course. International Journal of Science Education, 41(14), 1905–1925. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1647473
Wilson, R. (2018). Nature and young children: Encouraging creative play and learning in natural
environments. Routledge.
Yacoubian, H. A. (2020). Turning unwanted stereotypes about scientists into nature of science
learning experiences that foster social justice. In H. A. Yacoubian, & L. Hansson (Eds.),
Nature of science for social justice. Science: Philosophy, history and education. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47260-3_13.

PUBLICACION Life Stories of Graduate Students in Chile and The United States Influences On Becoming A Scientist From Childhood To Adulthood

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PUBLICACION Life Stories of Graduate Students in Chile and The United States Influences On Becoming A Scientist From Childhood To Adulthood

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Science Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

Life stories of graduate students in Chile and the

Marta A. Silva Fernández, Waleska Berríos, Paulina Sanzana & Andrew L.

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2161858

Published online: 04 Apr 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Life stories of graduate students in Chile and the United

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

CONTACT Marta A. Fernández marta.silva@uach.cl Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades, Universidad Austral de

Participants and their contexts

Childhood: playing science

Meanwhile, Tyler, a US participant who was encouraged by his teacher to compete in

Adolescence: studying science

Undergraduate years: studying and doing science

Transition to work experience: labouring in science

Graduate school: practising science and learning as a researcher

In line with perceptions of addressing genuine research problems, pursuing personal

Figure 1. Perceptions of science at diﬀerent life stages/educational levels.

transition between secondary school and undergraduate study in particular entails a

Environmental and Science Education, 12(5), 1299–1315. http://www.ijese.net/makale/1898.

You might also like