This study was designed to identify the variables that lead to the retention and attrition of talented men and women in science. It is an outgrowth of a longitudinal investigation conducted by the principal investigator with 1983 winners of the Westinghouse Science Talent Search (currently called the Intel Science Talent Search; Subotnik, Duschl, & Selmon, 1993; Subotnik & Steiner, 1993; 1994). The results of three earlier collection points have established patterns of external and internal influences that lead to participation in the research sciences, into applied sciences (e.g. medicine, engineering), or out of the field altogether.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArziH. (1989). From short-to-long term: Studying science education longitudinally. Studies in Science Education, 15, 15–53.
2.
CampbellD. T.StanleyJ. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
3.
CrosbyF. J. (1991). Juggling: The unexpected advantages of balancing career and home for women and their families. New York: Free Press.
4.
GaborA. (1995). Einstein's wife: Work and marriage in the lives of five great 20th century women. New York: Viking.
5.
HackettE. J. (1990). Science as a vocation in the 1990′s: The changing organizational culture of academic science. Journal of Higher Education, 61, 241–279.
6.
JacobiM. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 61, 505–532.
7.
KatchadourianH.BoliJ. (1994). Cream of the crop: The impact of elite education in the decade after college. New York: Basic Books.
8.
LederbergJ. (1990). Reflections on scientific biography. In LederbergJ. (Ed.), The excitement and fascination of science: Reflections by eminent scientists Vol. 3, (pp. xvii–xxiv). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Review.
9.
LewisD. J. (1991). Mathematics and women: The undergraduate school and pipeline. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 38, 721–723.
10.
LightR. J. (1990) The Harvard assessment seminars: Explorations with students and faculty about teaching, learning, and student life. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Graduate School of Education and Kennedy School of Government, Cambridge, MA.
11.
LongJ. S. (1990). The origins of sex differences in science. Social Forces, 68, 1297–1315.
12.
MahonyR. (1995). Kidding ourselves: Bread winning, babies, and bargaining power. New York: Basic Books.
13.
MoenP. (1992). Women's two roles: A contemporary dilemma. New York: Auburn House.
14.
MurrayH. G. (1987). Development of scientific productivity: Impact of graduate teaching and thesis supervision. In JacksonD. N.RushtonJ. P. (Eds.), Scientific excellence: Origins and assessment (pp. 328–340). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
O'BrechtM.PihlR. J.BoisP. (1989). Criteria for granting research training awards to graduate students. Research in Higher Education, 30, 647–664.
16.
OlsenD.MapleS.StageF. K. (1995). Women and minority faculty job satisfaction: Professional role interests, professional satisfactions, and institutional fit. Journal of Higher Education, 66, 267–293.
17.
Root-BernsteinR. S. (1989). Discovering. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18.
SeymourJ. (1992). The “Problem Iceberg” in science, mathematics, and engineering education: Student explanations for high attrition rates. Journal of College Science Teaching, 21, 230–238.
19.
SimontonD. K. (1992). The social context of career success for 2,026 scientists and inventors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 452–463.
20.
SonnertG. (1995). Who succeeds in science: The gender dimension. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
21.
StephanP. E.LevinS. G. (1992). Striking the motherlode in science: The importance of age, place, and time. New York: Oxford University Press.
22.
SternbergR. J.ForsytheG. B.HedlundJ.HorvathJ.WagnerR. K.WilliamsW.SnookS.GrigorenkoE. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
SubotnikR.F. (in press). Transforming elite level musicians into professional artists: A view of the talent development process at The Juilliard School. In ShavininaL.FerrariM. (Eds.) Beyond knowledge: Extracognitive facets in developing high ability. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
SubotnikR. F.ArnoldK. D. (1995). Viewing talent development longitudinally: An aid to policy making. Educational Forum, 59, 372–380.
25.
SubotnikR.F.SteinerC. (1994). Problem identification in academic research: A longitudinal case study from adolescence to early adulthood. In RuncoM., (Ed.) Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 188–200). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
26.
SubotnikR. F.SteinerC. (1993). Adult manifestations of adolescent talent in science. Roeper Review, 15, 164–169.
27.
SubotnikR. F.DuschlR. A.SelmonE. H. (1993). Retention and attrition of science talent: A longitudinal study of Westinghouse Science Talent Search winners. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 61–72.
28.
ZuckermanH. (1996). Scientific elite: Nobel laureates in the U.S (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
