Summary of previous research findings on science identity.
| Research | Findings | The Significance of Research |
|---|---|---|
| Brickhouse, Lowery & Schultz (2000) [4] |
• A students’ science identity is influenced by society and culture • A students’ science identity is associated with others’ perceptions of the students, the student’s self-perception, and an interest in science |
• Attempt to explore factors influencing students’ science identity |
| Carlone & Johnson (2007) [5] |
• Based on Brickhouse, Lowery & Schultz (2000), Carlone & Johnson argued that science identity comprises three dimensions: Recognition, Performance, and Competence |
• Developed a framework for science identity |
| Hazari et al. (2010) [6] |
• Modifying some aspects of three-dimensional framework proposed by Carlone & Johnson(2007) and included the dimension of Interest |
• Included dimension of Interest |
| Lee & Kang (2018) [7] |
• Proposed a three-dimensional framework, integrating the dimensions of Performance and Competence into the dimension of Self-Efficacy |
• Integration Attempt of the Performance and Competence dimensions • Found that there’s a positive correlation between physics identity and aspirations for physics-related careers |
| Rhee, Choi & Chung (2021) [8] |
• Science Identity is composed of two dimensions: Recognition, Participation • Argued that the Recognition dimension is composed of four factors: Recognition of science learning/teacher, scientific self-concept, aspirations for a science career. • Argued that Participation dimension is composed of three factors: involvement in school, involvement at home, and involvement outside of school |
• Attempted revision of science identity framework |