Back

Writing for identity? Exploring the motivations of pre-college students to participate in science publication

Fankhauser, S. C.; Bhagatwala, T.

2026-01-09 scientific communication and education Community evaluation
10.1101/2025.03.27.645794 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Scientific publication represents a pinnacle of professional communication in science. While traditional pre-college science classrooms offer various outlets for scientific communication through lab reports and presentations, access to scientific publication, in particular, remains largely out of reach for these students. Yet, this landscape is beginning to shift as an emerging cohort of young researchers challenges this barrier by publishing their work in peer-reviewed journals. This study investigates why pre-college students voluntarily undertake the rigorous process of scientific publication, revealing important insights about student motivation and identity development in science. Through analysis of survey responses from student authors using the lens of science identity theory, we discovered that students view publication as a vehicle for contributing to the scientific community and building ones own self-efficacy in the process. Female-identifying students in particular emphasized publication as a pathway to gain recognition as scientists and develop professional writing skills. These findings challenge traditional assumptions about pre-college science communication and suggest that access to authentic publication opportunities may be a powerful, yet underutilized tool for fostering science identity and expanding participation in STEM fields. Our research provides critical insights for educators and policymakers seeking to create more authentic and empowering pathways into science careers.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.