INFLUENCES OF STUDENTS TO SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND
MATHEMATICS (STEM) IN SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
Cabrera, Vince Harvey A., Diabo, Leah V., Orillo, Gladys Ann P., Ymbong, Rhoniel Ryan J.
University of San Jose-Recoletos
Basak Pardo, Cebu City
Abstract
This study aims to identify the factors that influence the current enrolled STEM students
that also relates to their level of satisfaction to the usage and availability of the school’s
facilities and their perception towards teachers’ availability and competence. Anchored to the
Social Cognitive Career theory, the researchers used survey questionnaires that are both
quantitative and qualitative in nature and were conducted to the STEM students for the school
year 2017-2018 in the University of San Jose-Recoletos (USJ-R) Senior High School.
Researchers used Mean, Frequency, and Percentage analysis tool and the results reveal that
among the personal choice, parental choice, peer influence, school facilities and attractiveness
of the strand; personal choice of the student has the greatest influence among the other factors.
The level of satisfaction of students to the usage and availability of the facilities is neutral. Their
perceptions towards the teachers’ availability and competence reveals that teachers need to
improve their teaching pedagogy. Thus, a student’s personal choice will be influenced by lots of
differentfactors.
Keywords: STEM strand, academic track, K to 12, curriculum, education
1.0 Introduction
A strong education system will result to a strong nation (Sergio, 2012). K to 12
Curriculum aims quality education for our countrymen (Alonzo, 2015). Science and technology
are essential for national development and progress (1987 Philippine Constitution Article XIV,
Section 10). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) address shortage of
science illiteracy (Cruz, 2014). Many factors influence students’ perception in choosing a
specific strand (Abarro, 2016). This study determines the influences of students to STEM strand.
STEM is an integrative form of instruction combining scientific study, technology,
engineering design and mathematical analysis (Department of Education in Massachusetts,
2000). The features of the K to 12 Enhanced Basic Education Program include the strengthened
Science and Mathematics education that follows a spiral progression which is believed to
strengthen retention and mastery of topics and skills as they are revisited and consolidated with
increasing depth and complexity of learning in the succeeding grade levels (Quijano et al., 2012).
Science and Mathematics proficiency had been pointed out by their Philippine President Benigno
Simeon C. Aquino III as one among his 10-point basic education agenda aimed at rebuilding
infrastructures for science and math education so the Philippines can produce quality graduates
in these fields and will ensure the country’s pool of expert professionals who are globally
competitive (Piamonte, 2012). Furthermore the new curriculum was the response of the
government to the call of the educators for the standardization of the country’s educational
system to comply with international standards (Braza, 2014). Creating scientific capable
workforce and literate society were related for requiring students to study science (Palmer et. al.,
2017). It has been a concern that graduates weren’t ready for employment for they lack some of
the most basic skills employers were looking (Tymon, 2011). A well-established science
education before entering college were considered to be “absolutely essential” or “extremely
important” according to the 31% interviewed college students. The most frequent factors cited
were having passion and studying hard. A STEM survey was conducted by Microsoft and Harris
Interactive polling company revealed that only 20% of the students perceived themselves as
“extremely well prepared” in their fields before entering college (STEMReports, 2011). The
levels of preparation and collaboration from the dedicated professional teachers should be
directly correlated to the levels of achievement and competitiveness of the students. Both
teachers and students should have the same high level of proficiency to sustain the demands of
science related jobs. It was identified that the individual efforts together with the parental
support, collaborated with the support of the STEM teachers had greatly affected an individual
choice (Faitar and Faitar, 2013). A literary overview suggested that to be able to increase the
interest and self-concept of students towards STEM: classroom management and quality of
instruction, involvement in research, interest in materials and classroom composition,
interventions outside of the classroom, and external frames of reference anchored to the “Big
Fish Little Pond Effect” (BFLPE) must be considered by educational practitioners (Beier and
Rittmayer, 2008). It was found out that the best indicators for students to take STEM were their
academic capabilities, interests, and attitudes (Gallant, n.d.). Students usually enter STEM strand
because they perceived science as their favorite subject and is essential for them in the future
career especially for those individuals who would apply in a university (Warwick Institute for
Employment Research, 2011). However, these factors namely enjoyment, interest and ability in a
subject, and perceived future career were considered the most essential factors in pursuing or
rejecting a subject (Palmer et. al., 2017). Though the STEM students in general had fewer firmed
personal goals, it is compensated that they tend to study more, to theoretically contribute to the
field, and to have stable career compared to non-STEM students (Gallant, n.d.). There were five
domains that were considered in assessing students’ interest towards STEM strand: interest and
engagement, competence and reasoning, attitude and behaviour, career knowledge and
acquisition, and content knowledge. These domains were further categorized into two main
components: proficiency and interest. The first two domains were under the interest component
while the other three domains were under the proficiency component. These two components are
necessary to increase the number of students who would likely enrol STEM (UMASS Donahue
Institute, 2011). Mostly students who enrolled in STEM strand were influenced by two factors:
the family and the teacher. When a student had a family that worked on STEM related jobs, the
students were likely enrolled in STEM. When a student had an influential science teacher that
would engage them in first-hand experiences, it would likely ignite their interest and probably
consider taking STEM (TISME, n.d.). STEM education should be done through experiential
learning in which it would create learning communities that could ignite students’ interest to
pursue STEM related careers (Gallant,n.d.).
The K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum has already been implemented nationwide. For
future Filipino workers to be globally competent, the curriculum was implemented in the
Philippines. For someone to decide of something that could change his or her life; one must
know its importance and relevance. Most of the Filipinos prefer to choose scientific related
courses or courses that are popular (Pascual, 2014) and DepEd’s data revealed that the number of
students enrolled in STEM increases as the years go by since the implementation of the new
basic educational system. Statistically basing on the performance of Filipino practitioners that is
in lined with the STEM curriculum, we ranked low in the international setting (The Manila
Times, 2014). Thus, the researchers would like to know the factors that helped the current
enrolled STEM students in choosing the strand as a career path and understand what are the
reasons why there large are number of practitioners of STEM in the Philippines.
The researches’ objectives are to know which factor greatly affects the choice of a
student in choosing STEM; the level of satisfaction of the students in the usage of the facilities in
the university; and the perceptions of the students in terms to the number of teachers availability
and their competence. This study will aid in addressing the performance of the teachers, the
satisfaction level of students to the facilities and the probability for a student to stay in the strand.
2.0 Conceptual Framework
The study revolves on the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), a relatively new
theory that is aimed at explaining three interrelated aspects of career development: (1) how basic
academic and career interests develop, (2) how educational and career choices are made, and (3)
how academic and career success is obtained. The theory incorporates a variety of concepts (e.g.,
interests, abilities, values, environmental factors) that appear in earlier career theories and have
been found to affect career development. Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) represents a
relatively new effort to understand the processes through which people form interests, make
choices, and achieve varying levels of success in educational and occupational pursuits (Lent,
Brown, & Hackett, 1994).
Three intricately linked variables—self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and
goals—serve as the basic building blocks of SCCT. Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s
personal beliefs about his or her capabilities to perform particular behaviors or courses of action.
Unlike global confidence or self-esteem, self-efficacy beliefs are relatively dynamic (i.e.,
changeable) and are specific to particular activity domains. People vary in their self-efficacy
regarding the behaviors required in different occupational domains. For example, one person
might feel very confident in being able to accomplish tasks for successful entry into, and
performance in, scientific fields but feel much less confident about his or her abilities in social or
enterprising fields, such as sales. SCCT assumes that people are likely to become interested in,
choose to pursue, and perform better at activities at which they have strong self-efficacy beliefs,
as long as they also have necessary skills and environmental supports to pursue these activities.

Self-efficacy beliefs are assumed to derive from four primary sources of information:
personal performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences (e.g., observing similar
others), social persuasion, and physiological and emotional states. Personal
accomplishments (successes and failures with specific tasks) are assumed to offer a
particularly compelling source of efficacy information, but the nature of the social
models and reinforcing messages to which one is exposed, and the types of physiological
states one experiences while engaged in particular tasks (e.g., low levels of anxiety), can
all affect one’s self-efficacy regarding different performance domains.

Outcome expectations refer to beliefs about the consequences or outcomes of performing
particular behaviors (e.g., what will happen if I do this?). The choices that people make
about the activities in which they will engage, and their effort and persistence at these
activities, entail consideration of outcome as well as self-efficacy beliefs. For example,
people are more likely to choose to engage in an activity to the extent that they see their
involvement as leading to valued, positive outcomes (e.g., social and self-approval,
tangible rewards, attractive work conditions). According to SCCT and the larger social
cognitive theory, persons’ engagement in activities, the effort and persistence they put
into them, and their ultimate success are partly determined by both their self-efficacy
beliefs and outcome expectations.

Personal goals may be defined as one’s intentions to engage in a particular activity (e.g.,
to pursue a given academic major) or to attain a certain level of performance (e.g., to
receive an A in a particular course). In SCCT, these two types of goals are, respectively,
referred to as choice goals and performance goals. By setting goals, people help to
organize and guide their own behavior and to sustain it in the absence of more immediate
positive feedback and despite inevitable setbacks. Social cognitive theory posits that
goals are importantly tied to both self-efficacy and outcome expectations: People tend to
set goals that are consistent with their views of their personal capabilities and of the
outcomes they expect to attain from pursuing a particular course of action. Success or
failure in reaching personal goals, in turn, becomes important information that helps to
alter or confirm self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations.
Social Cognitive Career Theory
Parental Choice
Peer Influence
Personal Choice
Students
Choosing STEM
as a Strand.
School Facilities
Attractiveness of the Strand
Teacher’s Factor
Figure 1.Conceptual Framework
3.0 Research Design and Methods
Design and Participants
This study made use of a qualitative and quantitative research design. It is qualitative
because it stipulates the level of satisfaction of the students towards the availability of facilities
in STEM. It is quantitative because it measures the degree of effect to the personal choice of the
STEM students. The tool used to analyse the gathered data was Means, Frequency, and
Percentage.
The researchers conducted a survey to the current students enrolled in STEM in the
University of San Jose-Recoletos Senior High School Department school year 2017-2108. They
were chosen to participate in the study because the focus of the study is to identify the different
factors and the factor that greatly affected the career choice of the students in choosing STEM as
their career path; their the level of satisfaction in the usage and availability of their facilities; and
their perception towards teachers’ availability and competence .
Measures and Procedure
The tool used was survey questionnaires. The researchers used survey questionnaires in
gathering data that was interpreted, and presented. These questionnaires contain Yes or No
questions, few open-ended questions, and percentile and scaling survey. The questions are based
upon the objectives of the study. The survey was conducted to the 80% of the total population of
STEM students in the university.
Hypotheses
In 2016 a lot were enrolled in the Senior High School level all throughout the country. In
USJ-R being the 1strank in the number of students enrolled in the STEM strand, we the
researchers hypothesized that the factors that made the students choose STEM will be the
following:
H1: Parental Choice matters to some of the students that’s why students were enrolled in the
strand.
H2: Personal Choice being able to follow the dream of becoming a professional in the field.
H3: Peer Influence will somehow matter. Filipino culture comes in to this scenario, when many
of the friends enter a strand, one will enter as well.
H4: Attractiveness of the Strand will constitute in a way that a person will choose a strand
where they think is good and will give them a good career in the future.
H5: School Facilities matter to the students in a way that the students will hear feedback from
other students enrolled in the same university.
4.0 Results and Discussion
The K TO 12 Program has been implemented back in the year 2016 and will be fully
implemented by the year 2018 because the program will successfully produce their first batch of
graduates. In the University of San Jose-Recoletos there are 2,300 students enrolled in the Senior
High School. 1,039 of which is in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
strand; constituting 46.04% of the population of the Senior High School, and ranking 1stamong
the other academic tracks. Through the research we have conducted, the researchers were able to
find out the following results.
Figure 2. A graph of the influences that affects the influences of the students to STEM strand
Percent Influence
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Personal Choice Parental Choice
Peer Influence School Facilities Attractivenessof
the Strand
In big universities, the number of students in STEM is high. The first method was
conducted to find out the level motivation of which influence greatly affected the students’
affinity of the strand. It was in the perception of the researchers that students’ choice does not
only rely to one factor. It was determined that 65.47% of the students’ chose STEM as a strand in
their personal perspective. 14.81% of the students’ decision came from the parent’s influence.
5.98% of the students were influenced by their peers who may be taking the same strand, or who
introduced the strand to the students. Students also considered the facilities found in the
institution as their reference in choosing the strand. Lastly, the students’ decisions were also
affected by the influence in the attractiveness of the strand. A student could anchor his choice in
these factors that will help them decide on the career to take. Personal interest, skill and
meaning, challenges and parental support were factors considered by students entering senior
high school (Witko, Bernes, Magnusson and Bardick 2006). Furthermore, school structure was
considered as one of the contributors to students’ decision in their career track (La, 2009).
Palmer 2017 stated that pursuing or rejecting a subject, advices from students’ peers, teachers or
from their parents was less considered by the learners.
Figure 3. Parental influences and the students’ perception to their decisions
Parent's Influence
11%
20%
Parents who chose STEM
Students’ who Agreed to their
Parent's Decision
Parent’s agreed to Student’s
Decision
18%
Parents who Suggested Another
Strand
51%
Figure 4. The preferred strand of the parents who suggested another strand
Parents Preferred Strand
8%
9%
ABM
HUMMS
25%
GAS
58%
TVL
14.81% of the student’s choice came from the perception of their parents. With this,
students already showed Self efficacy because these students are capable of choosing their own
strand with the influences that surrounded them. These parents are the ones who let their child
pursue STEM as a strand. As seen in figure 3, the number of students who agreed to their
parent’s decision in choosing STEM is only about 24.76% and 75.24% of the students aren’t in
line with their parent’s decision to take the STEM strand as a career path. Parents who agreed to
their child’s personal choice in choosing STEM is remarkably high. This may be because these
parents are happy because their child chose a career path that would soon be helpful for them
because of job statistics, or because they are happy their child chose the same career field they
took. 14.30% of the parents who did not agree in their child’s decision suggested a different
career path. As seen in table 3, Accountancy, and Business Management (ABM) ranks first in the
most desired strands of the parents.
Table 1.The level of satisfaction of students towards the facilities of the school
Level of Satisfaction
Mean
Interpretation
N
Biology Laboratory
2.77
Chemistry Laboratory
2.78
N
Physics Laboratory
2.65
N
Robotics Laboratory
2.71
N
Engineering Laboratory
2.59
D
Computer Laboratories
3.49
S
Drafting Laboratory
2.67
N
Library Books
3.80
S
Study Lounges
3.61
S
Projectors
3.88
S
Speech Laboratory
2.82
N
Mini Theatre
2.88
N
Mini Stalls
3.05
N
Session Room
2.88
N
Wi-Fi ready Working Laboratories
2.97
N
Legend
VS
S
N
D
VD
Range
5.00-4.21
4.22-3.41
3.40-2.61
2.60-1.81
1.80-1.00
Interpretation
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
The facilities of the university were also rated by the students. Students were told to rate
the facilities with 5 the highest, and 1 with the lowest. If the students ranked a facility with 5, it
means that the students are very satisfied with the availability, and the quality of the facilities. 4
if the students are only satisfied with the facilities, 3 if the students are only neutral in their
satisfaction. Neutral meant that the students are only okay with the facilities, because of the
availability, and the thought of the facilities to be of high quality because it is offered here in the
universities. 2 if the students are dissatisfied with the services and 1 if the students are very
dissatisfied.
In acknowledging the students’ satisfaction in the usage, and availability of the facilities
in the university, we were able to find out that the students are more neutral in the rating. A lot of
students were not able to use these facilities but were able to perceive that the facilities are
usable, and of high quality. It is quite alarming that more students are dissatisfied with the
engineering laboratories, where in fact, a lot of STEM students are dispersed in the Engineering
field, and these students are in need of immersion and hands-on work for them to be able to have
the quality of education that is being offered in the school.
Figure 5.1. The level of peer influence in the decisions of the students
Peer Factor (Friends who suggested STEM)
22%
Peer Factor (Friends who
suggestedSTEM)
Friends who did notsuggest
STEM as astrand
78%
Figure 5.2 Friends who suggested STEM as their strand
Friends who suggested and took STEM as well
7%
Friends who suggested and took
STEM as well
Friends who suggested and took
STEM as a strand but are not
STEM students
93%
Students who were geared in choosing STEM were also influenced by their friends.
Reasons such as these are affecting the students’ perception and influence to the strand. 21.51 %
of the students were given a suggestion by their peers and almost all of which are also enrolled in
STEM, or are in the fields in lined with the STEM curriculum. This implies that these students
show self-efficacy in their interest with students that may have common interests and it would
enrich their experience in school if they are in school with their friends and at the same time it
directed them to where they belong.
Students get this low attraction rate in the strand they’ve took. Upon seeing this, a lot of
employers are in need of labor each year. Employment rate in the Philippines is expected to be at
93.60 % by the end of the quarter. With this, analysts estimated that the employment rate in the
Philippines to stand at 94.20% in 12 months’ time. In the future, the Philippines employment rate
is projected to trend around 94.30% in the year 2020. (Trading Global macro models and
analysts) With this being said, there are lots of job opportunities that these students may be able
to acquire by the start of the year. Before they graduate in college, these students have a wider
chance of getting a job directly by the help of the enhancements in college. After senior high
school, we have found out that the level of proficiency of the students in the field is low.
Employers are not confident in hiring fresh graduates from senior high school because they are
not equipped with skills that are enough to be competent that is in comparison to a fresh graduate
in college.
Teacher's
Availability
Teacher's
Competency
No
49%
51%
Yes
Table 6.1 Teacher’s Availability
No
48%
52%
Yes
Table 6.2 Teacher’s Competence
One of the factors that may contribute to the competence of the student is the availability
and competence of teachers. They have the vital role in transferring the skill to the students, but,
in the survey, 52.3% of the students think that their teachers are not competent enough in
handling, and transferring the skill to their students. It has a difference of almost 5 with the
students who said that their teachers are not competent in teaching. This is because a lot of their
teachers are not a bachelor in education graduate. This is due to the availability of the teachers in
college who have high educational attainment. The teachers lack high regards in pedagogy,
which is very important for this new batch of senior high school students. Supposedly these
students are in college, but because of the new educational system they remain as “High School”
students. This adds up to the mind-set to some of the students who would tend to act as if they
are really students in high school. They interact in the same four walls of a single room, teachers
will have to transfer from one room to another, and lastly, they get to see the same people every
day and interact with them in the same way. This is where pedagogy enters. Pedagogy is really
an important tool for a teacher especially when dealing students in the 21st century.
5.0 Conclusion
It is evident that the factors affecting a student’s decision in choosing a career choice may
greatly affect their academic performance in the field. The students will always have their own
ways, and at the end of the day, it always boils down to their decisions. The students’ decisions
aren’t really just because of one factor. A lot of students were influenced by their parents, and by
environmental factors affecting their self-efficacy. In the university, the perception of the
students to the facilities is only neutral. With this, the university needs to provide the students the
quality education, and quality services the university had offered. It was also found out that the
faculty members in the university are quite enough, but their competency needs to be improved.
The quality of education in university’s senior high school needs to be improved, since the new
educational system was adopted by the university. A lot of students from the Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics area have greater opportunities when they graduate
in the degree they will be soon taking. There are lots of students enrolled in the strand, but the
readiness of the Philippine educational system is still questionable. Big universities aren’t even
ready, how much more those of the public schools. With this, the researchers recommend to the
future researchers that the scope of this study be a bigger scope. This study will serve as a
pioneering research to future researchers in consonance to the status quo that the senior high
school isn’t ready, and needs a lot of new research for improving the Philippine educational
system, making the Philippines’ educational system recognizable in the internationalsetting.
References
Abarro, J. (2016). Factors Affecting Career Track and Strand Choices of Grade 9 Students in the
Division of Antipolo and Rizal, Philippines. International Journal of Scientific and
Research Publication, Vol. 6, Issue 6. Retrieved from: http://www.ijsrp.org/researchpaper-0616/ijsrpp5409.pdf
Alonzo, R. (2015). Understanding the K to 12 Educational Reform. Philippine Social Sciences
Review 67. Retrieved from: journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/pssr/article/download/5260
Beier, M. and Rittmayer, A. (2008). Literature Overview: Motivational factors in STEM: Interest
and Self-Concept. SWE-AWE-CASEE ARP Resources. Retrieved from:
http://www.AWEonline.org
Braza, Melanie T. and Supapo, Sweden S. (2014). Effective Solutions in the Implementation of
the K to12 Mathematics Curriculum. West Visayas State University. Iloilo City.
Retrieved September 15, 2016 from www.googlescholar.com
Cruz, I. (2014). The STEM stand MINI CRITIQUE. The Philippine Star, Retrieved from:
http://www.philstar.com/education-and-home/2014/07/03/1341906/stem-strand?
Palmer, T.A., Burke, P. and Aubusson, P. (2017). Why schools students choose and reject
science: a study of the factors that students consider when selecting subjects. Retrieved
from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500693.2017.1299949
Faitar, G. and Faitar, S. (2013). Teachers’ Influence to Students’ Science Career. American
International Journal of Social Science. Vol. 2 No. 5. Retrieved from: www.aijssnet.com
Gallant, D. (n.d.). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education.
Retrieved from: https://www.mheonline.com
Pascual, N. (2014). Factors Affecting High School Students’ Career Preference: A Basis for
Career Planning Program. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research
(IJRBAR), Vol. 16, No. 1, 1-14. Retrieved from:
http://www.urs.edu.ph/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/2261-4881-1-PB.pdf
Philippine Statistics Authority
Piamonte, M. U. (2012). Primer on the Enhanced K to 12 Basic Education Program.
Unescoclubphilippines.unescoclubphilippines.weebly.com/.../unesco_clubs_talk_on_k12_mar.
Retrieved
December
23,
2013
from
http://www.unescoclubphilippines.weebly.com
Trading Global Macro Models and Analysts
Quijano, Yolanda S. & Technical Working Group on Curriculum (2012). Orientation for K to 12
Division Coordinators. DepED Complex. 20 April 2012.
Sergio, M.R. (2012). K-12 Education Reform: Problems and Prospects. Gibo_n vol. IX (2011)
pp. 70{80
STEMReports (2011). Why Students Choose STEM. Retrieved from:
http://www.stemreports.com/why-students-choose-stem/
Targeted Initiative on Science and Mathematics Education (TISME) (n.d.). What influences
participation
in
science
and
mathematics?.
Retrieved
from:
https://www.sciencecentres.org.uk
The Manila Times (2014). Science Education Realities. Retrieved from:
www.manilatimes.net/science-education-realities/100096/
Tymon, A. (2011). The student perspective on employability. Retrieved from:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075079.2011.604408?src=recsys&journ
alCode=cshe20
UMASS Donahue Institute (2011). Increasing Students Interest in Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math (STEM): Massachusetts STEM Pipeline Fund Programs Using
Promising Practices. Retrieved from: www.mass.edu