Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40636937›Full record

ArticleHumanities & social sciences communications2025

Making their minds up: flux and stability in young children's career aspirations in North East England.

Carol Davenport, Annie Padwick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Humanities & social sciences communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Carol DavenportNorthumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Annie PadwickNorthumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

School career information advice and guidance in England has typically focused on pupils aged 13-18. However, pupils aged under 11 have already formed career aspirations. Career aspirations are used as a proxy for future occupational destinations. This study tracks the individual career aspirations over 3 years for 78 children aged 7-9 at the start of study, from three schools in the North East England taking part in a STEM outreach project. The data are also used to explore the applicability of aspiration development frameworks for younger children. The majority of children were able to name at least one career aspiration with nearly 70% naming more, although these aspirations were drawn from a relatively narrow pool of jobs related to children's interests and jobs they see around them. 38% of the children had the same aspiration over time, but 60% of children changed their careers aspirations completely over the 3 years of the study. Career aspirations were strongly gendered, with boys naming a smaller pool of jobs most often. Between 2019 and 2021, there was an increase in STEM aspirations named by boys, and a decrease by girls. Thematic analysis of the reasons given for different aspirations identified four themes: self-actualisation, altruism, characteristics of the job, and role models. These themes were related to the aspiration frameworks. This study shows that there is both flux and stability in children's aspirations between the ages of 7 and 11. The gendered career choices at both time points indicate that there is a need for educators to challenge stereotypes about who can do what type of job from a much earlier age. All aspirations were drawn from a relatively small pool of job suggesting that introducing children to a wider range of jobs at an earlier age could support development of aspirations.

Indexed as

EducationScience, technology and society

Identifiers

PMID40636937
PMCPMC12234352

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.