TPC Journal V8, Issue 3- FULL ISSUE

The Professional Counselor | Volume 8, Issue 3 271 Table 3 Variables in the Equation for Hypothesis 2 95% C.I. for O.R. Variable B S.E. Wald O.R. Lower Upper Ethnicity 6.445 Ethnicity (African American/Black) .542 .448 1.467 1.719 .715 4.134 Ethnicity (Hispanic) .243 .349 .484 1.275 .643 2.528 Ethnicity (Asian/Pacific Islander) 1.636 .698 5.494 * 5.137 1.307 20.185 Ethnicity (Other) .403 .684 .347 1.497 .391 5.725 Initial Major 17.362 ** Initial Major (Declared STEM) .223 .328 .460 1.250 .656 2.379 Initial Major (Declared non-STEM) -1.792 .468 14.664 ** .167 .067 .417 STEM Seminar (Non-CP) .588 .323 3.327 1.801 .957 3.389 SAT Math .004 .003 2.536 1.004 .999 1.010 Math Placement–Algebra .005 .002 5.449 * 1.005 1.001 1.009 Constant -2.994 1.378 4.717 .050 Note : B = Coefficient for the Constant; S.E. = Standard Error; O.R. = Odds Ratio; * p < .05; *** p < .001. Discussion The researchers sought to determine the degree to which a set of demographic variables, math scores, and career-related factors could predict undergraduate retention in STEM majors. Based on descriptive statistics, the participants are remaining in STEM majors at a higher rate than other nationwide samples (Chen & Soldner, 2013; Koenig, Schen, Edwards, & Bao, 2012). The sample in this study was quite different based on gender than what is commonly cited in the literature; approximately 46% of the study’s sample was female, whereas the NCSES (2017) reported that white females made up approximately 31% of those in STEM fields, with minority females lagging significantly behind. The present study’s sample was more in line with national statistics with regard to ethnicity (NCSES, 2017; Palmer et al., 2011). With Hypothesis 1, the researchers sought to improve on a pilot study (Belser et al., 2017) that did not include demographics or math-related variables. Adding these additional variables did improve the overall model fit and the accuracy of predicting non-retained students, but slightly decreased the accuracy of predicting retained students, as compared to the Belser et al. (2017) model. In addition to improving the model fit, adding in additional variables reversed the claim by Belser et al. (2017) that students in the STEM-focused career planning class were more likely to be retained than the STEM seminar students. In the present study, the STEM seminar students, who declared STEM majors prior to the first day of college, were more likely to be retained in STEM majors, which is in line with prior research connecting intended persistence in a STEM major to observed retention (Le et al., 2014; Lent et al., 2016).