Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

How do CHOICES and the SDS facilitate or hinder career planning Provost, Charles Henri 1987

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1988_A2 P76.pdf [ 8.22MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0053658.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0053658-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0053658-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0053658-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0053658-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0053658-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0053658-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0053658-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0053658.ris

Full Text

HOW  DO CHOICES AND THE SDS F A C I L I T A T E OR HINDER CAREER PLANNING By CHARLES HENRI  PROVOST  B.A, The U n i v e r s i t y o f M a n i t o b a , 1971 B.Ed., S a i n t F r a n c i s X a v i e r U n i v e r s i t y , 1972 M.Ed., A c a d i a U n i v e r s i t y , 1979 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE  REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION IN  THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Counsel1ing-Psycho1ogy)  We a c c e p t to  THE  this  thesis  the required  as c o n f o r m i n g standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November Charles  Henri  1987 Provost,  1987  In  presenting  degree  at  this  the  thesis in  University of  partial  fulfilment  of  of  department  this or  publication of  thesis for by  his  or  that the  scholarly purposes may be her  representatives.  It  this thesis for financial gain shall not  COOMS&t-t-JA/t- - Psi/Cffo^oO^f  The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3  for  an advanced  Library shall make it  agree that permission for extensive  permission.  Department of  requirements  British Columbia, I agree  freely available for reference and study. I further copying  the  is  granted  by the  understood  that  head of copying  my or  be allowed without my written  II Abstract  CHOICES,  the  career  p l a n n i n g computer p r o g r a m ,  evaluated  by i n t e r v i e w i n g  Using the  critical  elicited  of  planning.  of  what f a c i l i t a t e d  to  technique,  possible  students.  reports  or h i n d e r e d t h e i r  to  program does t o  capitalize  were career  i n c i d e n t s were c a t e g o r i z e d  h e l p or  p l a n n i n g . T h i s map p o t e n t i a l l y  counsellors  on b e n e f i t s  by  w i t h a map hinder  enables and t o  minimize  detriments.  Secondly, similar  11 and 12  p r o v i d e c o u n s e l l o r s and o t h e r s  e x a c t l y what t h e  career  it  incident  These c o l l e c t e d  similarity  35 g r a d e  was  this  map was q u a l i t a t i v e l y  evaluation  was f o u n d t h a t  compared t o  of  the  Self-Directed  Search. O v e r a l l ,  the  two  interventions  have  differing  a d v a n t a g e s and d i s a d v a n t a g e s . CHOICES s t r e s s e s constraints,  a  s p e c i f i c i t y and e x t r i n s i c  work  reality  features.  The SDS u n d e r l i n e s s e l f - a w a r e n e s s and an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of  the  matching p r o c e s s .  appropriate  for  seems t h a t  CHOICES i s  more  p l a n n i n g and s p e c i f i c d e c i s i o n s  regarding options while general  It  exploration  the  SDS t e n d s t o  f o c u s on  and d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g  fields.  III Acknowledgements  The w r i t e r the  following To D r .  patience, years  wishes  to  Cochran, research supervisor,  availability  made t h i s  especially  to  persons:  Larry  To D r .  express his a p p r e c i a t i o n  and c o u n t l e s s h o u r s o v e r  six  study p o s s i b l e .  Marv Westwood, for  whose  the  whose c o n t i n u a l  clinical  support  comprehensive,  was  greatly  appreciated. To D r . appropriate To D r . the  oral  Bill  B o r g e n , whose e n c o u r a g e m e n t  time enabled  the  perservere.  Norm Amundson, whose  presentation  To D r .  me t o  at  inspired  synthesis  made  smoother.  Ron M a c G r e g o r ,  whose s u g g e s t i o n s were  appreciated. To t h e Senior  students,  S e c o n d a r y and t o  whose c o - o p e r a t i o n To M r s . effort  in typing  sisters  the the  this  of  Matthew M c N a i r  c o u n s e l l o r Mike C a s s e l m a n ,  for  her  study p o s s i b l e .  devoted  time  and  dissertation.  t o my p a r e n t s  L o u i s e and A n i t a ,  continual  staff  and s u p p o r t made t h i s  Irma E i c h l e r ,  And f i n a l l y ,  their  to  and t o  s u p p o r t and  Rene and L u c i l l e , my b r o t h e r  encouragement.  Jean,  t o my for  IV TABLE OF CONTENTS  Abstract  II  Acknowledgements  III  Table  IV  List  of of  Contents Tables  VII  CHAPTER 1  :  Introduction  1  CHAPTER 2  :  CHOICES  5  Computer  A s s i s t e d Career  Guidance  5  Evaluation  8  Evaluation  of  Description Evaluation CHAPTER 3  :  Extent  Comupter-based  of of  System-  CHOICES  Research  12 16  CHOICES  The S e l f - D i r e c t e d of  Guidance  20 Search  (SDS)  24 24  A s s u m p t i o n s and D e s c r i p t i o n  25  E v i d e n c e and S u p p o r t  27  Types of  28  Studies  Criticisms  of  the  SDS  Needed R e s e a r c h CHAPTER 4  :  35  Methodology  Subjects Critical  34  39 39  Incident  Technique  40  Interview Procedures  43  Data A n a l y s i s  45  V CHAPTER  5  :  Results  46  CHOICES F a c i l i t a t i v e  Categories  52  CHOICES H i n d e r i n g C a t e g o r i e s  61  SDS F a c i l i t a t i v e  70  Categories  SDS H i n d e r i n g C a t e g o r i e s CHAPTER  6  :  85  Comparison  Comparison of  95  CHOICES and SDS  95  Safeguards  -  CHOICES  104  Safeguards  -  SDS  107  Other CHAPTER  7  110 :  Reliability  and V a l i d i t y  Reliability  of  Categorization  Reliability  as V a l i d i t y  117 117 122  Comprehensiveness  122  Level  of  Abstraction  123  Basis  of  Categories  124  Position  of  Reporters  to  Report  Incidents Agreement Validity CHAPTER  8  :  Valid 126  with Research  127  as U s e f u l n e s s  130  Discussion  141  Limitations  142  Implications  144  Implications Summary  for  Future  Research  150 152  VI REFERENCES  1  5  4  APPENDIX A  Computer  APPENDIX B  Routes  APPENDIX C  Routes  195  APPENDIX D  C o n s e n t Form  197  APPENDIX E  Categories  199  APPENDIX F  Types of  Based Guidance  to  Type o f  Categories  Student  Types of  I  Type o f  J  Type o f  student 203  (CHOICES)  in 207  each  student  (SDS)  214  Student  who  i n each c a t e g o r y APPENDIX  each  who p a r t i c i p a t e d  Categories  expressed APPENDIX  192  (CHOICES)  each c a t e g o r y APPENDIX H  190  Information  expressed APPENDIX G  System  Student  (SDS) who  i n each c a t e g o r y  participated 218  participated  (Other)  227  APPENDIX K  Map o f  CHOICES and S a f e g u a r d s  230  APPENDIX L  Map o f  SDS and S a f e g u a r d s  233  APPENDIX M  Map of  Other  Career  Planning  Letter  and Q u e s t i o n n a i r e  APPENDIX N  Experienced APPENDIX  0  Summary o f Differences SDS  Ways o f  Facilitating 240 to  126  Counsellors Similarities of  241 and  CHOICES and  the 247  VII TABLES  Table  1  :  CHOICES f a c i l i t a t i v e  categories  50  Table  2  :  CHOICES h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s  63  Table  3  :  SDS f a c i l i t a t i v e  71  Table  4  :  SDS h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s  Table  5  :  What e l s e would be h e l p f u l  categories  87 in  career  planning Table  6  :  111  Percentage  of  agreement  between  judges  and e s t a b l i s h e d c a t e g o r y s y s t e m s Table  7  :  Y e a r s of  experience  responding to Table  8  :  Summary o f  of  120  counsellors  questionnaire  counsellors reaction  135 to  the  CHOICES c a t e g o r i e s Table  9  :  Summary of  counsellors reaction  SDS c a t e g o r i e s  136 to  the 138  Page  1  CHAPTER 1  Introduction  The g e n e r a l a i m o f practice to  of  career  two p r o m i n e n t  and t h e  interventions,  r e s e a r c h on t h e s e or  improve  Search (Holland,  interventions  for  to  1974).  regard 1976a)  Generally,  has been c o n c e r n e d w i t h  o u t c o m e s . The g e n e r a l failed  the  with  CHOICES ' ( J a r v i s ,  interventions  outcome s t u d i e s have these  s t u d y was t o  counselling, particularly  Self-Directed  products  this  problem i s  clarify  or  that  distinguish  informed c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e .  I n v e s t i g a t e d outcomes have been  inconsistently  confirmed,  t o main p u r p o s e s o f  sometimes t a n g e n t i a l  interventions,  and v e r y  reasonably clear intervention lacking. to  incomplete.  and c o m p r e h e n s i v e p i c t u r e  does to  facilitate  A c c o r d i n g l y , the  take p l a c e d u r i n g facilitate  or h i n d e r  contributes  would be i n a b e t t e r client  of  involvement  needs, prepare  the  what e a c h  planning this  is study  process events  to c a r e e r  p o s i t i o n to to  is  that and  p l a n n i n g . W i t h a more  d e s c r i p t i o n of  clients  of  a  w i t h each i n t e r v e n t i o n  career  c o m p r e h e n s i v e and d e t a i l e d intervention  career  s p e c i f i c a i m of  provide a categorization  that  Currently,  the  how e a c h  planning, counsellors  match i n t e r v e n t i o n s benefit,  build  in  to  Page 2 safeguards, future  add s u p p o r t i v e a c t i v i t i e s ,  outcome s t u d i e s . CHOICES  (computerized  heuristic  information  career  interactive  computerized career  designed to  help students  there are  Columbia,  tend  exploration  system),  i n Canada, i n the  United of  foster  career  studies  (e.g.,  C a s s e r l y , 1977;  Schellenberg,  1981;  1982)  However,  this  of  i n d i c a t i o n o f whether o r how t h e y  evaluation  about  provide  e v i d e n c e on e x a c t l y  hinders  clients.  reasons.  p a c k a g e works  is  1980;  of a p p r o a c h .  g i v e s o n l y an  it.  or c o u n s e l l o r s T h e s e s t u d i e s do n o t  important  for  in a better  benefits  that  evaluation  or  Knowing how CHOICES o r a n y o t h e r  h e l p p e o p l e t o maximize  and  s e l e c t i n g and c o m p a r i n g  grounds  career  various position  minimize  T h e o r i s t s would have a b r o a d e r  s u p p o r t and t h e y would have b e t t e r evaluating,  in Europe,  how CHOICES b e n e f i t s  C o u n s e l l o r s would be  detriments.  British  have been done on  u s e r s , parents felt  While  process events  Guerette,  Van Z o o s t ,  in  and  p l a n n i n g . A number o f  using a questionnaire-type type  system  CHOICES p r o g r a m s  States  the  CHOICES,  assistance  an  c o l l e g e s and employment c e n t r e s  has been no e v a l u a t i o n  it  is  exploration  number o f  to  liked  occupational  in planning a career.  presently a great  in schools,  there  and s h a r p e n  base  of  for  interventions.  to  Page 3 As a l o w - c o s t Self-Directed about  the  rival  Search  (SDS)  It  these  instruments  two  might  t i m e and e x p e n s e  the  SDS. Over  the  SDS, but  two  (or  of  O'Neil,  Price  & Tracey,  & Birk,  1979) .  1978;  development t h a t would  of  1979;  what t h e y do seems t o This through  hinder  what t h e  be  using actually career 1979a;  & Holland,  SDS b o t h  to  1979;  lack  a  help  or  problems  (Fretz,  1981;  has i n f l u e n c e d  used i n t h i s  the  study.  A study  SDS work  and  warranted. specific objectives.  this  in career  outcomes a r e  as t o  interventions  studies  1979),  what a s p e c t s o f  progress  if  considering  Holland,  how CHOICES and t h e  s t u d y has two  interviewing,  determine  Takai  how t h e  rationale  investigate  know  in planning a  coupled with various  Olivier, the  career  have been done  & H a n s e n , 1977;  a s s o c i a t e d with t r a d i t i o n a l Goldman,  effects  on CHOICES and t h e  lack,  in  c o u n s e l l o r s to  students  f o c u s on e x a c t l y This  help  for  a CHOICES s y s t e m as compared  hinders)  Dolliver  (1977a)  designed  many q u e s t i o n s p e r s i s t  1972;  The s t u d i e s  to  have s i m i l a r  (Brown,  hinder.  a workbook  hundred s t u d i e s  still  helps  specific  is  be h e l p f u l  the  Talbot  CHOICES, H o l l a n d ' s  same p u r p o s e a s CHOICES, t o  planning.  how i t  to  that  project the  attempted  First, to  CHOICES p r o g r a m h e l p  p l a n n i n g and a l s o t o help  or h i n d e r .  By  or  specify  Page 4 interviewing technique elicit  s t u d e n t s u s i n g the  (Flanagan,  reports  hindered t h e i r CHOICES.  career  career  counsellor  Second,  is  potential this  important  not  with  categorized  v a r i o u s ways CHOICES m i g h t  to  type  capitalize  o f map,  help  a  on b e n e f i t s  and  detriments.  the  only for  of a p p r o p r i a t e  wants and n e e d s .  involvement  map was compared q u a l i t a t i v e l y of  or  p r o v i d e c o u n s e l l o r s and  p l a n n i n g . With t h i s  evaluation  selection  the  would be a b l e  to minimize  what f a c i l i t a t e d  i n c i d e n t s were to  incident  study proposed to  planning in their  similarity  o t h e r s w i t h a map o f or h i n d e r  this  from s t u d e n t s of  These c o l l e c t e d  according to  similar  1954),  critical  SDS. A q u a l i t a t i v e evaluation, interventions  but for  to  a  comparison  for  informed  different  Page CHAPTER 2  CHOICES  Computer-Assisted Career  One o f  the  psychologists  major  is  to  Guidance  functions  facilitate  of  counselling  career  d e c i s i o n and  career  planning  (Krumboltz,  Becker-Haven, & Burnett,  1979).  With the  vast  of  amount  a comprehensive career Hawkins,  & Brenner,  computer  seems q u i t e  (e.g., 1978;  Jarvis, Super,  have e x p r e s s e d t h e methods t o  p l a n n i n g approach  1983),  the  1978;  1978;  facilitate  innovative  career  new n o t i o n .  As e a r l y  a s 1950,  c o n s i d e r i n g computers implementing enumerated Butler  Gray,  computers  often  & Dowsey,  Colozzi  i n the 1978;  & Haehnlen,  1986;  (Jarvis,  guidance  1978).  H a n s o n , 1986;  1983;  Smith,  and  1980)  better development.  (CACG) i s  not  The r e a s o n s  c o u n s e l l i n g have  literature  1982;  authors  a  p e o p l e were s e r i o u s l y  in career  Closs,  the  Tolbert,  p l a n n i n g and  Computer-assisted career  of of  Myers & C a i r o , 1983;  for  (Greehnaus,  A number  Tiedeman,  need f o r  required  introduction  appropriate.  1976a,  1970,  information  1978;  (Ballantine, Coglon,  D o n o v a n , 1980;  been  1986;  1987;  Dowsey,  Harris-Bowlsbey,  for  1983a,  1978; 1983b  Page 6 1984;  Heginbotham,  1978;  Jarvis,  1983;  Mar-Brennan,  1981;  McKinlay,  & Super,  1969;  Pound,  1981;  Sampson,  1983.  1986a;  Sankey,  1978;  Spencer,  1970,  1978;  Wagman,  Taylor,  1984;  Wisudha,  1979;  Wallis,  1985).  1.  store  information clerical  Price,  Stahl, 1978;  1978;  1978;  Watts,  T h e s e would  1971;  Pyle,  Sharf,  1984;  1984;  Smith,  1986;  Super,  Turgeon,  1978;  Wooler &  the  capacity  q u i c k l y vast  reduce  Meyers,  1980;  include  and r e t r i e v e  and t h e r e f o r e  Minor,  Sugarman,  Tolbert,  & Shatkin,  1984;  1977;  1984;  Katz  the  1979;  to:  amounts  of  counsellor's  tasks.  2.  do t h e s e  tasks  repeatedly  and w i t h  complete  accuracy. 3.  stimulate  therefore the  personalize  generation 4.  numbers,  had a c t u a l l y (See  transaction  through  by t h e  declined to  Hansen  enumerates  self-assessment  and  assisting  fewer  With the of  50  career  data than  advent  of  b a s e s and 20  the  1975,  software,  (Jarvis,  1978)  micro-computer,  programs and s y s t e m s  (1986) c i t e s over  client.  40 s u c h s y s t e m s . By  inadequate  proliferation  occurred.  while  client  alternatives.  t h e r e were o v e r  Appendix A ) .  another  that  of  the  be p a c e d c o m p l e t e l y  By 1 9 6 5 , the  a c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h the  has  a s t u d y by B e l l o t t o  (1985)  computer-assisted and e d u c a t i o n a l  guidance  and  Page 7 c o u n s e l l i n g p r o g r a m s . The m a i n - f r a m e have been c a t e g o r i z e d a s f i r s t ,  systems  s e c o n d or  generation  by Rayman and B o w l s b e y ( 1 9 7 7 ) .  generation  batch  information  however,  third The  s t o r a g e and  first  retrieval  s y s t e m c a n be r e p r e s e n t e d by S t u d e n t G u i d a n c e Information Services ( J a r v i s , second g e n e r a t i o n retrieval  on-line  system i s the  actually  on-line  of  Career  1978;  interactive  Smith,  and  1978).  information  i n f o r m a t i o n and  guidance content are  Interactive  storage  of  Computerized V o c a t i o n a l  go beyond c a r e e r  significant  An example  information  I n f o r m a t i o n System ( J a r v i s , generation  1978).  Third  systems t h a t deliver  exemplified  by S y s t e m  G u i d a n c e and I n f o r m a t i o n , C o m p u t e r - B a s e d  Development  System ( B u t l e r  & Dowsey, 1978;  Rayman  & B o w l s b e y , 1977;  Tiedman, 1983).  Now, CACG s y s t e m s a r e  often  i n two  systems:  categorized  types  s y s t e m s and c o m p l e t e c a r e e r (Haring-Hidore, study,  CHOICES, f a l l s  currently United 1983) .  1984;  of  guidance systems  Johnson, between  1983). these  b e i n g used e x t e n s i v e l y  States  and i n E u r o p e  information  The f o c u s o f  two t y p e s and  i n Canada, i n  (Jarvis,  1986;  this is  the  Johnson,  Page 8  Evaluation  Few e v a l u a t i o n s effectiveness  of  computer  recent  vocational  Fretz,  1981;  Osipow, 1984;  underlined p.155) the  the  not  a s p e c t of  career this  and money s p e n t  in creating  fundamental  Hall,  1978).  hinder) 1982;  find  clients  out  (Zytowski,  1978, but  literature.  to  Most o f  programs,  examination career  implement the  has of  is career  energy,  time,  severely exactly  planning  why and how t h e y  (Cairo, 1966;  Those s t u d i e s  that  interventions  Goldman (1978)  progressively  what  (Super &  including  career  have been t h o r o u g h l y r e s e a r c h e d and  Krumboltz,  career  have  Few c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e s ,  interventions,  1983;  T i n s l e y & Heesacker,  interest  1971.  or h i n d e r s s t u d e n t ' s  to  1978)  Muchinsky,  development  by t h e  helps  evaluated  1978;  1977;  p o o r l y managed e v a l u a t i o n  e d u c a t i o n programs a f t e r  the  1979;  (Betz,  Nine  only computer-based research  pressure created  curtailed  al.,  Zytowski,  One r e a s o n f o r the  reviews  " s p o t t y and u n e v e n "  a s p e c t of  whole  et  Super & H a l l , 1979;  the  based guidance s y s t e m s .  intervention  Krumboltz  1976;  Walsh,  have been done t o d e t e r m i n e  1983;  benefit  G o l d m a n , 1978;  Tolbert,  identified  Healy,  1980).  have a t t e m p t e d t o  have r u n  (or  into  several  evaluate  a number o f  problems.  methodological  Page 9 weaknesses that,  in various  apart  of  studies.  f r o m a few b e h a v i o u r a l  interventions due t o  types  techniques,  i n c o u n s e l l i n g have c h a n g e d  s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h and e v a l u a t i o n  and S a n d e r s  (1973)  weaknesses of  the  have  outlined  the  Questionnaire-types  of  i n the  evaluation  and o f  CHOICES i n p a r t i c u l a r  1977,  1978;  1980;  Guerette,  Cassie,  Schellenberg, VanZoost,  understands are  1980;  Sloan,  Wilson,  is  the  Herzberg, that  Mausuer,  no r e a l  an a n s w e r ,  to  really  about  affected major  criteria  1982;  (b)  been u s e d  It  Spencer,  that is  the  right  (1966)  p e r s o n and  and c o r r e s p o n d e n t  (1973)  client  steer  the  questions.  have a l s o  how  the  questions  further,  just  the  Some of  and S a n d e r s  constructed  probe  1982;  1981).  the  Gosse,  1979;  p o s s i b l e to  understand  problem i s  programs  Casserly,  Laird,  assurance that  way t o  the  1978;  Wright,  & Snyderman  is  Another  data  them.  by Worthen  carefully  there  intervention  and  have g e n e r a l l y  1980;  q u e s t i o n s or  through  and  Worthen  & R o b i n s o n , 1979;  1979;  no r e a l  b e i n g a s k e d , and  respondent  strengths  (Cairns,  Himler,  as o u t l i n e d  There  significantly  c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d guidance  Ragsdale,  1981;  1982;  difficulties (a)  of  studies  few  studies.  various methodologies  c o l l e c t i n g schemes a s s o c i a t e d w i t h  are:  He s t r e s s e d  to  added clarify  the  why.  lack  of  agreement  instruments  to  assess  Page effectiveness 1981;  Healy,  Ballantine, range  1982; 1983;  decided.  data,  to  by whether  goal  intervention  for  use o f  example,  every  the  dropout rates  jobs.  All  variables are  of  a r e drawn t o  i s not always  take the  (Cochran, criteria,  intervention. use o f  unwarranted  To t a k e t h e for  an  a third  (1979),  the  i n view of  increase  for  CHOICES would  reduce  youth  t h e r e would be a in  first  p r o b l e m s . The  example,  credit  problem  the  thus r e d u c i n g r e t r a i n i n g  for  Being  1987).  Spencer  present  is  demonstrate  in v o c a t i o n a l programs, that  rate,  are  effective  to s u b s t a n t i a t e  associated with,  blame  that  F o r some p e o p l e ,  be a more  n o t i o n of  these c r i t e r i a  extensive.  reliability  become d e c i s i v e o r  unemployment would d e c r e a s e and t h a t turnover  These  one i n t e r v e n t i o n  individual.  the  Watts &  new i n t e r v e n t i o n .  planning  speculated that  lower  1969;  definitions  clients  this  "hard d a t a " of  & Gressard,  stringent  For example,  or not  in career  effectiveness  the  operational  o p t i o n s might  L i n k e d with the the  lack  or d e c i d e d , however,  expanding t h e i r  is  that  P e r c e n t a g e s and t a b l e s  appropriate  Mines,  Williamson & B o r d i n , 1941).  c o s t - e f f e c t i v e n e s s of  decisive  Daniels,  Sampson, 1 9 8 6 b ; T y l e r ,  indiscriminately.  evaluated  the  1983;  from v a r i o u s t e s t s  and v a l i d i t y used  (Cairo,  10  for  unemployment,  the  d e c r e a s e or  to  i n unemployment would be  numerous r i v a l  factors  that  seem  Page more p l a u s i b l e A fourth systems are  (e.g.,  e c o n o m i c r i s e s and d e c l i n e s ) .  problem in e v a l u a t i o n  is that  the  computer  s o new and c h a n g i n g s o q u i c k l y t h a t  building  upon p a s t r e s e a r c h i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t Healy,  1982;  1986b).  the  A fifth Fretz  overlay  (1981).  Sampson, 1 9 8 6 a ;  i s needed i n o r d e r  various types  Client  (Healy,  affect  attributes the  have b e e n named a p t i t u d e  that  results  to  1982).  which a l l o w  for  intervention  use of  statistical  be d u b i o u s a s a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . only represent  the  interactions  the  That  tests is,  (ATI).  group but  tend  an a v e r a g e  that  can a f f e c t  an i n t e r v e n t i o n  numerous and combine i n numerous w a y s . T e s t i n g a l l them a p p e a r s t o for  be a h e r c u l e a n t a s k .  example,  Takai  f o u n d t h a t many  inventories  have s i m i l a r  differences  i n methods o f  this  Another  type  effects  of  intervention  population.  are of  interest  despite gross  development,  (Takai  h y p o t h e s i s c o u l d be t h a t  taps a c e r t a i n  may  and H o l l a n d  inventory  format  and p r o c e d u r e s . One h y p o t h e s i s s u g g e s t s a c e i l i n g for  to  a few p e o p l e .  The v a r i a b l e s  (1979),  by  could  of  treatment  s t u d i e s help to c o u n t e r - a c t  averages,  1984;  p r o b l e m has been t h o r o u g h l y d i s c u s s e d  differentially  ATI  (Griest,  J o h n s o n & Sampson, 1985;  A theoretical  co-ordinate  11  & Holland,  each type  Since this  type  effect  1979).  of  inventory  of  evaluation  Page stresses  averaging  difference, individual  for  we have no r e a l is affected  For  example,  the  but  actually  hinder  yield  know e x a c t l y  that  career  the  qualitative  intervention In  methods o f  1981;  E v a l u a t i o n of  h e l p a few  affects  conclusion,  However,  of  1981;  Hill,  Woolsey,  types  1982;  yet  still  people it  seems t o  seems  clear  and  methods  of might  be n e e d e d . A  s t r e s s i n g the of  studies  need  parents  L e c o m p t e , Dumont, &  1986).  C o m p u t e r - B a s e d G u i d a n c e Systems  be e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y and c o u n s e l l o r s ,  preferred the  way o f  traditional  be c a p a b l e  of  for  (Goldman,  C o m p u t e r - b a s e d g u i d a n c e s y s t e m s have g e n e r a l l y shown t o  to  (Fretz,  evaluations  qualitative  researchers are  greatly  would be h e l p f u l  have p r o v i d e d a d e q u a t e  of  intervention.  quantification  and d e s c r i p t i v e  Hayes,  Zingle,  It  added d i m e n s i o n t h a t  g r o w i n g number  1978;  difference.  intervention.  provide  might  of  majority s l i g h t l y ,  and more c o n c r e t e l y . traditional  significant  knowing w h i c h t y p e  by w h i c h t y p e  the  how t h e  experimentation  way o f  intervention  a significant  1981)  a statistically  12  sources.  generating  e n d o r s e d by s t u d e n t s ,  as e a s y t o  obtaining  been  career  Also,  u s e , and a s  information  they  measurable  the  instead  of  have been shown t o increases  in  career  Page 13 m a t u r i t y and H a r r i s , 1968,  o c c u p a t i o n a l knowledge ( C l o s s , 1974;  Maola & Kane, 1976;  Hershenson, & V e r m i l l i o n , 1973; Pinder  & F i t z g e r a l d , 1984;  1986;  Melhus,  P i l a t o & Myers,  P r i c e , 1971;  Pyle &  S t r i p l i n g , 1976;  Roberts & Witherspoon, 1978;  S t r i p l i n g , 1979;  Schenk, Murphy, & Shelton,  Spencer, 1979), of being u s e f u l with the impaired  1973;  Sampson & 1980;  hearing  (McKee Gelesko & C h i a v a r o l i S c h r o e d l , 1984),  with the l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d (Long, 1984), and s u p p o r t i n g decision-making  as  ( B a l l a n t i n e , 1986).  However, many s t u d i e s present e v a l u a t i o n problems. For example, Pyle and  Stripling  (1976) found  significant  growth i n c a r e e r m a t u r i t y as measured by the V o c a t i o n a l M a t u r i t y Inventory  (VMI)  on 66 students, u s i n g the  System of I n t e r a c t i v e Guidance and  Information  program. To know t h a t "career m a t u r i t y " has increased  computer  been  i s m i n i m a l l y h e l p f u l p a r t i a l l y because the  has been shown to lack i n v a l i d i t y and ( C a s s e r l y , 1980;  C h o d z i n s k i , 1983;  VMI  reliability  Pecku,  1982;  Robinson, 1982). But more i m p o r t a n t l y , t h i s f i n d i n g does not show e x a c t l y how the student  the  i n t e r v e n t i o n helped or  hindered  i n career plannng. Other r e s e a r c h e r s a l s o  s t r e s s the need f o r c o u n s e l l o r s to be aware of the advantages and disadvantages ( E b e r l y & Cech, 1986;  of CACG i n a s p e c i f i c  P y l e , 1984;  Sampson, 1986a).  way  Page Another  s t u d y examined the  in promoting career  effectiveness  d e c i s i o n making  1984).  Two i n s t r u m e n t s  measure t h e  career  d e c i s i o n m a k i n g commitment  1976)  students:  and t h e  the  Career  Assessment of  were c h o s e n t o  in Pinder  Career  encouraging to  & Fitzgerald, note  making commitment, career  planning  Other lack the  of  this it  (Cochran,  variance  experimental  of  the  While  (1976)  it  in career  as  is  decision to  1987).  for  pre-test  and c o n t r o l  by H a r r e n  necessarily beneficial  problems w i t h t h i s  published support  (Osipow,  D e c i s i o n Making  1984).  increase  i s not  of  Decision Scale  ( b a s e d on an u n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t noted  o f CHOICES  (Pinder &  Fitzgerald,  university  14  evaluation  stem from  one o f  instruments  scores  groups  the  between  (Pinder  the and  the  & Fitzgerald,  1984). Pyle  (1984)  researched awareness are  the  the  in order of  CACG:  to  further  What i s t h e  a p p r o a c h e s by w h i c h t h e  manage t h e of  s t r e s s e d many q u e s t i o n s t h a t  impact  of  strengths  of  the  c o m p u t e r s ? What best  computer  do t h e y do? What a r e  as  part  the  v a r i o u s s y s t e m s ? What  s y s t e m s need  improvement? A number  of  stressed  need f o r  evaluate  the  be  and  c o u n s e l l o r can  c o u n s e l l i n g p r o c e s s w i t h the  p r o c e s s ? What e x a c t l y  individual  o u r knowledge  need t o  new t o o l s  to  researchers  have  CACG Systems  Page 15 (Harris-Bowlsbey, 1984;  Walz & Bleuer, 1985). These  e v a l u a t i v e problems have not d e t e r r e d a t l e a s t  four  s t u d i e s from attempting to determine the best system ( J a r v l s , 1976b; Maze & Cummings, 1982; Morgan Management System,  1978;  Spencer,  1979).  In an e x t e n s i v e survey c a r r i e d out on the major computerized guidance systems Management Systems  i n North America, Morgan  (1978) concluded t h a t CHOICES was  among the best f o r d e l i v e r i n g c a r e e r i n f o r m a t i o n to c l i e n t s . These r e s u l t s were based on an a n a l y s i s of the c a p a b i l i t i e s of each system i n c l u d i n g p o t e n t i a l f o r future modification. Maze and Cummings (1982) a l s o o f f e r advice on to  choose a computer  how  a s s i s t e d guidance system and they  r a t e d CHOICES v e r y h i g h l y . In a comparison of the three dominant  t h i r d g e n e r a t i o n systems i n Canada (BISP, SGIS,  CHOICES), J a r v i s ,  (1976b) o u t l i n e d the advantages of  CHOICES over the o t h e r s : 1. official 2.  I t a l l o w s f o r access and p r i n t o u t i n e i t h e r language. I t has access to a n a t i o n a l  education/training  institution. 3.  I t has more f l e x i b i l i t y  and broader range of  data f i l e s with a p o s s i b i l i t y of changing any answer a t any time based on the computer  response. T h i s i s  Page 16 expected  to enhance the c a r e e r  decision-making  potential. 4.  I t i s designed  i n a predominately e x p l o r a t o r y  mode which f e a t u r e s d i r e c t access to data 5.  (interactive inquiry)  files. D e t a i l s of "why" s p e c i f i c occupations or  i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t were not l i s t e d can be accessed. 6.  Comparisons of pre-conceived o c c u p a t i o n a l or  i n s t i t u t i o n a l c h o i c e s on the b a s i s of any a c c e s s i n g criteria 7.  i s also  possible.  A l i n k a g e f i l e w i l l a l s o be e v e n t u a l l y  i n s t i t u t e d t o enable answers t o q u e s t i o n s l i k e ,  "What  can I do with my ( e d u c a t i o n ) ? " "How can I become a ( o c c u p a t i o n ) ? " Spencer (1979), a f t e r an e x t e n s i v e s e a r c h , a l s o found CHOICES s u p e r i o r i n many of the same ways, but a g a i n does not s p e c i f y e x a c t l y how i t helps career planning.  D e s c r i p t i o n of CHOICES  CHOICES o r i g i n a t e d  i n a 1976 proposal by P h i l  J a r v i s under c o n t r a c t with the Canada Employment and Immigration Commission. Some of i t s c a p a b i l i t i e s are i m p r e s s i v e : Information on 97% of the occupations i n Canada, d e t a i l e d  i n f o r m a t i o n on 1114 primary  occupations  Page 17 and  b r i e f r e f e r e n c e s t o over 3200 r e l a t e d The  occupations.  b a s i c assumption u n d e r l y i n g the CHOICES system,  i s t h a t there are three b a s i c processes  in vocational  guidance: 1.  Helping the i n d i v i d u a l t o know and t o  understand h i s or her own a b i l i t i e s and i n t e r e s t s . 2.  Supplying  concerning and  the i n d i v i d u a l with  e d u c a t i o n a l and o c c u p a t i o n a l  information opportunities  requirements. 3.  Helping him or her t o see the i m p l i c a t i o n s of  s i t u a t i o n a l and p e r s o n a l data (Jarvis,  f o r h i s or her c a r e e r  1976a).  CHOICES attempts t o provide an answer t o the problems of r e l a t i n g s e l f t o the world  of work  (Jarvis,  1982) . Another u n d e r l y i n g assumption i n CHOICES i s the importance of the i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t of client-counsellor-computer  ( J a r v i s , 1982a; Turgeon,  1979). The immediate r e a l i t y t e s t i n g  i n a low r i s k  c o u n s e l l i n g environment provides both the c l i e n t and the c o u n s e l l o r with  information that i s valuable  career c o u n s e l l i n g process  i n the  (Turgeon, 1979). CHOICES, i t  i s assumed, helps the c l i e n t by i n d i c a t i n g the degree to which they a r e :  Page 1.  oriented  2.  able  to  the  world  of  18  work  to  seek and u n d e r s t a n d  to  make d e c i s i o n s i n  to  recognize  vocational  information 3.  able  light  of  this  direction  of  this  information 4.  able  vocational  preference  the  (Turgeon,  CHOICES a l s o has a number for  c o u n s e l l o r s and t h e y  1979). of  would  behavioral  include  objectives  assisting  clients: 1.  in gaining a greater  2.  in a r r i v i n g  world  of  at  knowledge  a clearer  in developing career  4.  in  (Turgeon,  career  formulating,  attitudes,  manual,  self  understanding  of  the  work  3.  their  of  planning  d i s c u s s i n g and  v a l u e s and m o t i v a t i o n  1979).  Jarvis  (1982a),  evaluating  towards  in the  Counsellor's  d e s c r i b e s CHOICES as a t h r e e - p h a s e planning.  describes  the  In  first  entitled  A number  of  answered  i n the  A Handbook  questions divided Travel  aptitudes,  environmental  phase,  s y s t e m and h e l p s  workbook  Interests,  the  Guide  the  of  the  into  fill  12 t o p i c s a r e  out  education  a  1982b). then  undated):  outlook,  to  counsellor  students  (Jarvis,  future  approach  CHOICES ( J a r v i s ,  temperaments,  conditions,  work  level,  earnings,  Page hours of  work,  activities,  travel,  inside/outside  fields,  training  similar  occupations  each  required, (see  computer. keys,  considerations, summary o f  occupational  work p e r f o r m e d  Appendix B for  Here,  the  involves  student,  c a n have a p e r s o n a l i z e d  With the  aid  of  their  answer  questions  routes  are  SPECIFIC  and  a description  (see  search for needs,  any p r i m a r y  allow  to a n a l y s e  two  format.  previously chosen.  of  The t h i r d  the  users to  or  interaction,  recorded phase o f  this  three  various  EXPLORE r o u t e  compatible  with  and  to their  information  own c h o o s i n g .  for  about  SPECIFIC  w h i l e COMPARE  similar  part  in  The S P E C I F I C and  the  allows  concurrently occupations students  can  characteristics.  which averages  on a p r i n t o u t  they  COMPARE  occupations  share  P  Four  RELATED expands t h e  that  two  topics available  in d e t a i l  three  Guide  RELATED,  obtain  their  the  w i t h CHOICES.  From a base o c c u p a t i o n ,  many o t h e r s  The e n t i r e is  computer.  and a s p i r a t i o n s .  o c c u p a t i o n of  in a multiple  Travel  c a n use t h e  on one o c c u p a t i o n  generate  interaction  occupations that are  COMPARE r o u t e s  with  by p r e s s i n g one o r  EXPLORE,  Appendix C f o r  abilities  focuses  them:  Students  a conversation  completed  p o s e d by t h e  open t o  each r o u t e ) .  hour,  physical  topic). The s e c o n d phase  users  p h y s i c a l demands,  19  user  about to  an  keep.  p r o c e s s now b e g i n s .  Page 20 U s u a l l y the student needs help i n i n t e r p r e t i n g the p r i n t o u t , i n p l a n n i n g the next step or simply i n d i s c u s s i n g the v a l i d i t y of the b o i l e d down l i s t .  This  p r i n t o u t , as i n d i c a t e d i n the assumptions, i s meant t o generate  t h i n k i n g , probing and p l a n n i n g about the  person's c a r e e r o r i e n t a t i o n ( J a r v i s , 1982a).  E v a l u a t i o n of CHOICES Studies based on CHOICES have a l s o g e n e r a l l y side-stepped  the b a s i c q u e s t i o n of whether the  intervention i s e f f e c t i v e . A questionnaire-type e v a l u a t i n g a t t i t u d e s towards  of study  CHOICES r a t h e r than i t s  a c t u a l e f f e c t i n c a r e e r p l a n n i n g , comprised the o r i g i n a l field  trial  ( C a s s e r l y , 1977). T h i r t y students  John A. MacDonald High School  of the S i r  i n Ottawa r e p o r t e d t h a t  they l i k e d CHOICES because i t was f u n , easy t o use, e d u c a t i o n a l , and most i m p o r t a n t l y , non-threatening and a c c e p t i n g of any response made. A l s o the p r i v a c y and the immediacy of feedback were c o n s i d e r e d t o be v e r y p o s i t i v e . A m a j o r i t y a l s o thought t h a t CHOICES would a f f e c t t h e i r c a r e e r plans t o some degree. They a l l i n d i c a t e d t h a t other people  i n t h e i r age group should be  given the o p p o r t u n i t y t o work with CHOICES. About two t h i r d s mentioned t h a t they would now be a b l e t o t a l k to t h e i r parents more e f f e c t i v e l y about t h e i r c a r e e r  plans  Page 21 a f t e r t a k i n g home t h e i r CHOICES p r i n t o u t . These o r i g i n a l f i n d i n g s have been confirmed  i n v a r i o u s p r o v i n c e s and  s t a t e s by subsequent and s i m i l a r studies  questionnaire-type  ( C a i r n s , 1978; C a s s i e e t a l . , 1979; C o l o z z i &  Haehnlen, 1982; Gosse, 1980; Guerette, 1982;  1980; Himler,  L a i r d , 1982; Pinder & F i t z g e r a l d , 1984;  S c h e l l e n b e r g , 1981; Sloan, 1980; Spencer, 1979; VanZoost, 1982; Wilson,  1979; Wright, 1981).  In a more r i g o r o u s - l o o k i n g e v a l u a t i o n ( p r e - t e s t , p o s t - t e s t , experimental, (1978) administered  c o n t r o l group d e s i g n ) , C a s s e r l y  before and a f t e r q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o  c l i e n t s of Canada Employment Centres. A f t e r the 263 experimental  treatment,  s u b j e c t s were more i n c l i n e d to have  begun c a r e e r p l a n n i n g and implementation  steps than were  the 150 c o n t r o l s u b j e c t s who were more l i k e l y to have made no career p l a n n i n g d e s p i t e having r e c e i v e d t r a d i t i o n a l c a r e e r c o u n s e l l i n g . T h i s was deduced from a q u e s t i o n with seven o p t i o n s o f f e r e d t o the respondent. They were asked i f they were now (a) undecided, (b) q u i t t i n g s c h o o l , (c) c o n t i n u i n g t h e i r e d u c a t i o n , (d) l o o k i n g i n t o c a r e e r s by other means, (e) making c a r e e r implementation  s t e p s , ( f ) keeping  present  job, and (g)  o t h e r . On a c l o s e r i n s p e c t i o n of the raw data, three c h o i c e s favored the experimental other  only  group with the  four items even. The three chosen do not seem to  Page p o i n t s t r o n g l y a t evidence of career p l a n n i n g . one  The  first  chosen ( c o n t i n u i n g t h e i r education) does not  n e c e s s a r i l y i n d i c a t e good c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . The one  22  (making s p e c i f i c c a r e e r  implementation steps)  c l e a r l y s p e l l e d out. T h i s c o u l d mean whatever respondent wanted. We  have no r e a l way  problems a s s o c i a t e d with the t h i r d one  i s not  the  of knowing.  The  (more l i k e l y to  be " d e c i d e d " ) have been d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r . d e c i s i v e or decided  second  Being  i s not always a p p r o p r i a t e  or  d e s i r a b l e as an immediate outcome of career c o u n s e l l i n g (Cochran, 1987). Casserly  (1978) a l s o a s s e r t s i n t h i s  t h a t CHOICES users had  an  evaluation  i n c r e a s e d a b i l i t y to s e l e c t  jobs which are more p e r s o n a l l y s u i t a b l e and T h i s would, a c c o r d i n g  to C a s s e r l y ,  satisfying.  i n d i c a t e increased  career m a t u r i t y .  Again, on a c l o s e r examination of  raw data,  revealed  i t was  that t h i s f i n d i n g  the  was  t e n t a t i v e at b e s t . These people were asked i f they  had  found a job i n the l a s t month a f t e r using CHOICES and i f i t had  b e t t e r working c o n d i t i o n s than t h e i r former  job,  the same c o n d i t i o n s or worse c o n d i t i o n s . T h i r t y - s i x percent  (versus 11% of c o n t r o l group) r a t e d t h e i r  new  jobs b e t t e r . However, about the same r a t e d t h e i r new even (18% versus t h e i r new  16%)  and  16%  (versus o n l y 2%)  job worse. T h i s l a s t s t a t i s t i c  job  rated  is surprising.  Page 23 One c o u l d make a case f o r p r e s e r v i n g the s t a t u s quo by not u s i n g CHOICES or a t l e a s t not having a worse j o b ! But the most p u z z l i n g f e a t u r e of t h i s e v a l u a t i o n i s that we do not know what c o n t r i b u t e d t o these percentages or why. The o n l y completed  e v a l u a t i o n i n the l i t e r a t u r e  comparing CHOICES with another a computerized  intervention  (other than  one) i s by Reardon, B o n n e l l , & Huddleston  (1982). S e v e n t y - f i v e u n i v e r s i t y students were compared on the SDS and the e x p l o r e route of CHOICES. T h i r t y - s e v e n completed  the SDS f i r s t ,  then, w i t h i n 8  days, they went through CHOICES. T h i r t y - e i g h t o t h e r s used CHOICES f i r s t ,  then the SDS. Two n i n e - i t e m t e s t s of  a p p r e c i a t i o n or s a t i s f a c t i o n were used t o e v a l u a t e e f f e c t i v e n e s s . While both were r a t e d p o s i t i v e l y ,  CHOICES  was more so on four items. Again, these c o n c l u s i o n s do not i n d i c a t e e x a c t l y what students a p p r e c i a t e d about CHOICES or the SDS, nor do they d i r e c t how they were helped  (or hindered) i n t h e i r c a r e e r p l a n n i n g .  Page  24  CHAPTER 3  The S e l f - D i r e c t e d  Extent  of  (1977a) and t h e  CHOICES, t h e  annual v o c a t i o n a l Krumboltz et  1976;  Super & H a l l ,  Holland's theory  of  al.,  contribution  has g e n e r a t e d .  reviews  1979;  1978;  Zytowski,  1978)  have a l l  and t h e  Over t h r e e  SDS i t s e l f  is  people a year studies still  types  1979).  of  overview  of  the  framework,  (Holland,  type  those q u e s t i o n s .  1984;  one q u a r t e r  However,  of  on  his  study that  to  the  a  million  two  hundred  a number o f  This review  have  1977a).  will  underline  could better  The  questions  attempt,  assumptions, d e s c r i p t i o n ,  of  Osipow,  1978a) and on  SDS ( H o l l a n d ,  s t u d i e s and c r i t i c i s m s ,  accentuate  1983;  Fretz,  underlined  and has been u s e d i n o v e r  remain unanswered.  a brief  the  u s e d by o v e r  (Holland,  1977;  hundred s t u d i e s  Inventory  study,  the  ensuing research  Vocational Preference this  subjected  T i n s l e y & Heesacher,  theoretical  focus of  (Betz,  Muchinsky,  been p u b l i s h e d on t h e  the  has been  Holland  r e s e a r c h . For example,  literature  1981;  1979;  SDS b y J . L .  accompanying t h e o r y  an enormous amount  Walsh,  (SDS)  Research  As compared t o  to  Search  after  evidence, and answer  Page 25 Assumptions  and  Description  Holland's theory and t h e r e f o r e the SDS, i s based on three assumptions.  The f i r s t  i s t h a t there are s i x i d e a l  types of people: R e a l i s t i c , I n v e s t i g a t i v e , A r t i s t i c , S o c i a l , E n t e r p r i s i n g , and C o n v e n t i o n a l . The second, i s that there are s i x corresponding i d e a l types of environments.  These are d e f i n e d p a r t i a l l y by the work  that i s done, but mostly by the kinds of people t h a t work t h e r e . The t h i r d assumption  i s t h a t people who are  matched t o an a p p r o p r i a t e environment w i l l be more s a t i s f i e d , p r o d u c t i v e , and s t a b l e  (Holland, 1973).  These types are organized i n t o a hexagonal shape:  c  A  Page 26 On the b a s i s of a three l e t t e r code, the assumption i s that adjacent  types  ( f o r example RIA) are c o n s i s t e n t and  t h e r e f o r e are more congruent, more apt to be s t a b l e , p r o d u c t i v e and s a t i s f i e d . They are a l s o able t o f i n d an environment t h a t f i t s . Incongruent types EIR)  ( f o r example  w i l l have d i f f i c u l t y with a l l of these  (Holland,  1973) . The  SDS i s a s e l f - a d m i n i s t e r e d , s e l f - s c o r i n g and  s e l f - i n t e r p r e t e d c a r e e r c o u n s e l l i n g instrument. I t c o n s i s t s of two b o o k l e t s . The f i r s t  i s an assessment  booklet and the second i s the Occupation F i n d e r (Holland, 1978b). The user s t a r t s o f f by l i s t i n g o c c u p a t i o n a l daydreams and by l o c a t i n g the three  letter  code f o r each i n the Occupations F i n d e r . Then the respondent answers the next three Activities  ( s i x s c a l e s of eleven  " l i k e " or " d i s l i k e " responses; of eleven  subsections: items each) u s i n g  Competencies ( s i x s c a l e s  items each) and Occupations ( s i x s c a l e s of  f o u r t e e n items each) using "yes" or "no" responses f o r both. The f i f t h and f i n a l s u b - s e c t i o n Estimates  i s the S e l f  (two s e t s of s i x r a t i n g s , each r a t i n g  corresponding  t o a t y p e ) . T h i s t o t a l s 228 items and  u s u a l l y takes between 40 and 60 minutes. The respondent then c a l c u l a t e s a t h r e e - l e t t e r summary code r e p r e s e n t i n g the resemblance to the s i x p e r s o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n s  Page (Holland,  1979a).  The u s e r have  c a n now p r o c e e d t o  identical  w i t h the  This booklet  They are  the  personality/environment  the  number  of  to  456  booklet  Understanding Various  tend  enumerates  Canadian  Occupations  (CCDO)  in groups a c c o r d i n g types.  The  last  prevent  obtain  detrimental  to  section more  d e c i s i o n s and l i s t s  to  of  offers  congregate  traits  six  a  outcomes  towards  concrete  SDS  (Holland,  is 1977b).  personality  an e x p l a n a t i o n various  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the  five  career  E v i d e n c e and  and Your C a r e e r  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the  Holland  He t h e n o f f e r s  six  suggestions  types  on how t h e  six  occupations.  He  environments. for  increasing  decisions.  Support  The e v i d e n c e the  the  occupational  u s u a l l y accompanying the  Yourself  traits  listed.  quality  to  that  1979).  Another  that  presented  make v o c a t i o n a l  safeguards  (Holland,  types  codes from  SDS i n c l u d e s s u g g e s t i o n s on how t o  information  are  also  of  (1974).  of  lists  occupations  accompanying seven d i g i t  C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and D i c t i o n a r y  six  list  c o d e s and a l s o s i m i l a r  Occupations F i n d e r . titles  27  SDS and  found w i t h i n the its  literature  accompanying t h e o r y  are  indicates generally  Page 28 supported. 1977  The manual (Holland, 1979) s t a t e s t h a t the  e d i t i o n appears t o have the same r e l i a b i l i t y and  v a l i d i t y as the 1970 e d i t i o n . Odd-even r e l i a b i l i t y  was t e s t e d on 105 men and 104  women. The SDS r e f l e c t e d a high degree of i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y as the r e l i a b i l i t y  c o e f f i c i e n t s ranged from  .83 t o .95. Retest r e l i a b i l i t y  was demonstrated through  a s m a l l sample of a d u l t s (N=30) and the c o r r e l a t i o n s ranged from moderate to high  (Holland, 1979a).  G o t t f r e d s o n and Holland c o l l e g e students  (1975) t e s t e d 624 freshmen  (192 males and 432 females) f o r  p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y over a 3 year 43% stayed  i n t e r v a l . For males,  i n the same category. For females,  66% stayed  i n the same category. Another study  (Cutts 1977) demonstrated t h a t the  SDS has a moderate degree of i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y . Cutts noted  t h a t samples of 2000 t o 6000 c o l l e g e freshmen  showed c o r r e l a t i o n s ranging  from .67 to .94. She s t a t e s  that the item content and format r e f l e c t c l e a r  content  validity.  Types of s t u d i e s  G e n e r a l l y , the multitude p o i n t s t o a good grounding  of p u b l i s h e d  articles  of both theory and e m p i r i c a l  Page 29 data f o r the SDS  (Seligman,  1974). These a r t i c l e s can  be  organized i n f i v e types of s t u d i e s : 1.  The  f i r s t type, and  the most popular among  r e s e a r c h e r s , i s focused on the o c c u p a t i o n a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system, s t u d y i n g the s t r u c t u r e and/or v e r i f y i n g the i n d i v i d u a l o c c u p a t i o n a l codes 1983;  B o l t o n , 1985;  H o l l a n d , 1972; Walsh, 1976;  (Aubin,  Brusch & Krieshok, 1981;  Campbell &  Edwards & Whitney, 1972;  Fishburne  G o t t f r e d s o n & Daiger, 1977;  Hansen,  Healey & Mourton, 1984a, 1984b; H o l l a n d , 1976b; 1984;  Matthews & Walsh, 1978;  & Walsh, 1976;  Tracey, 1978;  Pounds, Davison, 1984;  O ' N e i l , 1977;  Osipow, 1983;  O ' N e i l , Magoon, &  & Davis, 1979;  Ward & Walsh, 1981;  1985;  P r e d i g e r , 1981; Smart,  V i l l w o c k , S c h n i t z e n , & C a r b o n a r i , 1976; 1983;  Iachan,  1974;  Payne & Sabaroch,  & Davis, 1979;  Rounds, Davison,  1977;  Mount & Muchinsky, 1978a,  1978b; N a f z i g e r , H o l l a n d , Helms, & McPartland, O'Brien  &  Rose,  1978;  Walsh e t a l . ,  Warren, Winer, & D a i l e y ,  Wiggington,  1983;  Winer, Wilson, & P i e r c e ,  Wiggington,  1983;  Zytowski,  1981;  1983;  1986).  The g e n e r a l l y p o s i t i v e f i n d i n g s lead us to b e l i e v e that the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and t h e o r e t i c a l  underpinnings  produce a f a i r l y sound system. Hanson (1987), even  found  c r o s s - c u l t u r a l v e r i f i c a t i o n of the hexagonal s t r u c t u r e . Future work i n t h i s area i s needed to u n c l u t t e r a  few  Page 30 a m b i g u i t i e s of the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y c a t e g o r i e s of R e a l i s t i c and Conventional  with the  (Holland,  1979) . 2.  Another area t h a t has been s t u d i e d e x t e n s i v e l y  i s the sex b i a s i n the SDS. (Boyd, 1976; Diamond, 1975; G o t t f r e d s o n , 1976, 1978, 1982; G o t t f r e d s o n & H o l l a n d , 1975;  Harmon & Zytowski,  1980; Healy & Mourton, 1984a;  H o l l a n d , 1976a, 1976b; Holland & G o t t f r e d s o n , 1976; H o l l i n g e r , 1984; Lawler,  1979; P r e d i g e r , 1976a, 1976b,  1981a, 1982; P r e d i g e r & Hanson, 1976a, 1976b; 1976;  T i t t l e & Zytowski, The  Schaefer,  1978).  many a r t i c l e s t h a t t h i s c o n t r o v e r s y has  generated  have not r e a l l y overcome even the simple  agreement on a d e f i n i t i o n of "sex b i a s " . The problem seems so m u l t i - f a c e t e d t h a t no r e a l c o n c l u s i o n s can be reached  (Crites,  maintains  1978). H o l l a n d ,  i n h i s 1979 manual,  t h a t t h i s area has had so many s t u d i e s that  have g e n e r a l l y f a i l e d t o c o n c l u s i v e l y demonstrate sex b i a s t h a t t h i s would seem t o suggest  an u n f r u i t f u l  line  of i n q u i r y . 3.  The t h i r d type of study i n c l u d e s attempts t o  v a l i d a t e the SDS u s i n g v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a  like  personality, values, s e l f - r a t i n g s ,  maturity s c a l e s ,  s e l f - c o n c e p t and the l i k e (Aranya,  Barak, & Amernic,  1981;  Bingham & Walsh, 1978; Byrne, 1980; C a i r o , 1979;  Page 31 Doty & Betz 1979; Meir,  1981;  Gottfredson,  Fitzsimmons & Melnychuk, 1979;  Holland  & N a f z i g e r , 1976;  & N a f z i g e r , 1975;  P r e d i g e r , 1984;  Peraino  Again, support  Holland,  L a i n g , Swaney, &  & Willerman, 1983;  Amernic, & Aranya, 1981;  Hener &  Rachman,  Raphael & Gorman, 1986).  the f i n d i n g s are g e n e r a l l y p o s i t i v e and  the SDS.  However, as p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d ,  an  examination of the assumptions of the c r i t e r i a would be paramount before any c o n c l u s i v e evidence  could  be  reached. For example, because someone does b e t t e r on Tennessee Self-Concept  Scale a f t e r completing  does t h i s mean t h a t the SDS planning?  Holland  has  facilitated  the  the  SDS,  career  (1979) suggests t h a t a b e t t e r path f o r  these s t u d i e s would be to i n v e s t i g a t e how  different  types s e l e c t environments. 4. the  A f o u r t h type of study examines the e f f e c t s or  i n f l u e n c e of the SDS  Healy & Mourton, 1983; 1979;  ( A v a l l o n e , 1974;  K r i v a t s y & Magoon, 1976; (  McGowan, 197.7; Nelson, 1976;  Nolan, 1974;  Nicholson,  O ' N e i l , P r i c e , & Tracey,  H o l l a n d , Daiger,  Byrne,  & T a k a i , 1979;  1979;  Lawler, 1975;  Power,  Reardon & Kahnweiler,  1980;  Reardon, B o n n e l l , & Huddleston, 1982;  1973;  Rhodes, 1973;  1979;  T a l b o t & B i r k , 1979,  Schaefer,  1977;  1976;  Redmond,  Takai & Holland,  Zener & S c h n u e l l e ,  1976).  Page 32 The m a j o r i t y of these s t u d i e s f o l l o w the same type of d e s i g n as Zener and students  Schnuelle  (1976): 959  were d i v i d e d i n t o an SDS  high s c h o o l  group, a VPI  group and  a c o n t r o l group. The day a f t e r the experiment, and weeks l a t e r , students e v a l u a t e d found t h a t the SDS o p t i o n s a person  the instruments.  three  It  was  i n c r e a s e s the number of v o c a t i o n a l  i s c o n s i d e r i n g , the s a t i s f a c t i o n with a  v o c a t i o n a l a s p i r a t i o n and  self-understanding. Generally,  subsequent s t u d i e s , as l i s t e d above, confirmed  these  findings. These b e n e f i t s do not seem to depend on the age  ( G o t t f r e d s o n & Daiger,  1977;  Schaefer,  1976)  c l a s s , e d u c a t i o n and s c h o o l a p t i t u d e (Zener 1976), gender (Boyd, 1976;  Gottfredson,  G o t t f r e d s o n & H o l l a n d , 1975; Lawler,  1979;  Schaefer,  & Walsh, 1976;  (Kimball, Sedlacek, 1976;  social  & Schnuelle,  1976;  H o l l a n d , 1976a; 1976b;  1976), p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l i t i e s  (Barker, 1978), l e v e l of occupation Fishburne  user's  (Doty & Betz,  Salomone & Slaney,  & Brooks, 1973;  O'Brien  1979;  1978), race & Walsh,  Walsh, Bingham, Horton, & Spokane, 1979), or  intelligence Schnuelle, 5.  (Holland, 1979;  Schaefer,  1976;  Zener &  1976). The  f i f t h type of study concerns a p r a c t i c a l  a p p l i c a t i o n of the t y p o l o g y . Three s t u d i e s ( A v a l l o n e , 1974;  K r i v a t s y & Magoon, 1976;  Nolan, 1974)  compared  Page 33 the SDS and group c o u n s e l l i n g on a wide v a r i e t y of criteria:  i n f o r m a t i o n s e e k i n g , s a t i s f a c t i o n with c h o i c e ,  r e a l i s m of c h o i c e , need to see a c o u n s e l l o r and number of v o c a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s . R e s u l t s d i d not c o n c l u s i v e l y favor one over the o t h e r . T h i s might i n d i c a t e t h a t the SDS and the c o u n s e l l o r have an equal  i n f l u e n c e . However,  much more must be done to s t a t e t h i s  authoritatively.  In business s e t t i n g s , a t l e a s t nine s t u d i e s lend support  to the SDS and i t s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  (Costa,  McCrae, & H o l l a n d , 1984; Doty & Betz, 1979; Matthews & Walsh, 1978; O'Brien & Walsh, 1976; Rachman e t a l . , 1981; Salomone & Slaney,  1978; Spokane & Walsh, 1978;  Utz & Hartman, 1978; Varca  & S h a f f e r , 1982; Walsh e t  a l . , 1979). In e d u c a t i o n a l s e t t i n g s , many s t u d i e s have been undertaken to e s t a b l i s h p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the SDS.  (Geoffroy, 1985; G o t t f r e d s o n & H o l l a n d ,  1975;  Nabors, 1981; O'Neil & Magoon, 1977; O ' N e i l , Magoon, & Tracey,  1978; O'Neil & Magoon, 1977; O ' N e i l , P r i c e , &  Tracey,  1979; Power e t a l . , 1979; V i l l w o c k e t a l . ,  1976).  Page Criticisms  of  the  Criticisms the  sex  simply  bias being  (Kline,  of  the  controversy  have m u l t i p l i e d , r a n g i n g (Prediger  a trait-factor  type  (Christensen,  1975;  Gelso, C o l l i n s ,  examined t h e  nearly  SDS  studies  Sedlacek,  (489  SDS  the  and  & Hanson, 1976)  of  Gelso, Williams, Williams  s e l f - s c o r i n g of the  same r e s u l t s : most o f  229  the  &  and  college  the  high  O'Shea and  Harrington  reliability,  found  freshmen  of  error; final  third,  three  the  errors  code. (1980) recommend t h a t  s e l f - s c o r i n g instruments provide  scorer the  point  f o r a b o u t one  &  Sedlacek,  SDS  r e s p e c t i v e l y ) made some t y p e  summary c o d e s and  affected  for  to  interest scale  a b o u t h a l f made e r r o r s w h i c h a f f e c t e d t h e i r letter  from  1975).  Two  1973)  34  that  s c o r i n g be  APGA t e s t s t a n d a r d s d e a l  manuals  data e s t a b l i s h i n g supervised  directly  with  and  that  scorer  reliability. In Buros for  the  (1978), s e v e r a l a r t i c l e s  psychometric basis  unreliability  of the  (1984), d e s c r i b e self-assessment unrealistic.  an  of  criticize  i t s s c o r i n g and  s e l f - s c o r i n g . Michal assessment  i n career  They c a u t i o n  of  the  and  accuracy  d e c i s i o n making  the  SDS  the Graumenz of  inventories  about a p o t e n t i a l b i a s  in  as  Page self-ratings. support  A recent a r t i c l e  for Holland's  (Schwartz,  congruence-achievement  Andiappan, & Nelson,  however, t h a t t h i s 50%  response  was  based  Needed  hypothesis  1 9 8 6 ) . I t must be one  noted  profession with  a  p r o b l e m s have been c o r r e c t e d . F o r  example, the s i m p l e r d e s i g n  (Holland,  on  the  rate to t h e i r q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  A number o f t h e s e  deriving  also questions  35  f o r adding  scores  t h e summary code e n c o u r a g e s l e s s 1979)  i n the  1977  edition  and  errors  of the  SDS.  Research  Generally, positive.  The  t h e enormous amount o f r e s e a r c h has  SDS  affects  people  in beneficial  1.  p r o v i d e s more v o c a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s  2.  reassures people  3.  stimulates exploration  4.  reduces  5.  leads to greater s a t i s f a c t i o n  about a c u r r e n t  ways:  alternative  indecision with  choice  However, k n o w i n g t h i s  i s only generally helpful.  still  these  do  derived.  not Is  been  know how  b e n e f i t s ( i f they are)  i t s i m p l y because  a l t e r n a t i v e s are presented a r e e x p a n d e d ? Does t h i s  We are  456 v o c a t i o n a l  t h a t the  expansion  user's  alternatives  facilitate  career  Page planning  f o r everyone?  study examining interest  i n v e n t o r y , 322  seems t h a t  job.  As  choices,  and  want t o f i n d  The  SDS  about  o u t how  male h i g h s c h o o l SDS  was  rated  by s t u d e n t s h i g h on  Daiger,  & Takai,  the range  f o r narrowing  the  that  same r e a s o n s . with d i f f e r e n t  rated  identity  exactly  to  specific of than  by  s c a l e and  skills  (Power,  and  still  by  1979).  the  a l l would r a t e How  their  rather  most p o s i t i v e l y  these are a l l averages  m a j o r i t y of females  about  for a  we  know w h i c h s t u d e n t s want w h i c h b e n e f i t s .  indicate  experience. It  which c a r e e r  to t r a i n  or b r o a d e n i n g  more s t u d e n t s o p t e d  Again,  intriguing  most s t u d e n t s s e e k r e a s s u r a n c e  s t u d e n t s w i t h good d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g Holland,  203  to evaluate t h e i r  f o r narrowing  broadening. females,  female  c h o i c e , want g u i d a n c e  e n t e r , and  i n an  s t u d e n t e x p e c t a t i o n f o r t a k i n g an  s t u d e n t s were a s k e d  current  For example,  36  SDS  positively, or  i t h e l p s or h i n d e r s desires  not  Because a  i t positively,  e x p e c t a t i o n s and  do  is  does  not  f o r the people  largely  unknown. A number o f r e s e a r c h e r s ( C o o p e r , Magoon, 1976;  Redmond, 1973;  & H o l l a n d , 1979; the  impact  limited  and  Zener  Krivatsy  Talbot & Birk,  & S c h n u e l l e , 1976)  of c o u n s e l l o r - f r e e the e f f e c t s  1976;  1979;  &  Takai  report that  vocational  treatments  is  of the d i f f e r e n t  techniques  are  Page more o f t e n and  s i m i l a r than d i s s i m i l a r . For  Holland  (VCS), the Insight  SDS  Kit  vocational divergent small.  (1979) compared and  the  that  VEIK e v e n  failed  i n d i v i d u a l components  and  Holland  are  not  the  t o s u r p a s s the  (the  that  SDS  and  the  other  f i n e enough t o d e t e c t  an  evaluation  for  another Holland  research:  i s formidable.  the  p o p u l a r i t y and he  e f f e c t s are  VCS).  using  Takai a  evaluative changes.  involved  The  i n such  the  need  the  longitudinal testing  needed type,  and  scheme, t h o r o u g h e x a m i n a t i o n  two  and  more a n a l y s i s o f three  letter  continually stresses (Holland,  of  the  codes,  code  c r o s s - c u l t u r a l c o m p a r i s o n s . However,  achieved  of  instrument.  of  environmental hypothesis,  that  influence  illustrates  interaction studies,  diagnostic  classifications  area  This  evaluative  validation studies  the  rather  (1979) s u g g e s t s a number o f a r e a s o f  person-environment revising  perhaps, the  number o f v a r i a b l e s  type of  than  r e a l l y e f f e c t i v e . Another  instruments are  the  and  subsequent  that,  c o m p l e x i t y and  Sort  i t i s perhaps because  h y p o t h e s i s m i g h t be not  Takai  diverse  these e f f e c t s are  e f f e c t i s r e a c h e d and  interventions  that  have s i m i l a r r a t h e r  e f f e c t s and  speculate  Card  Exploration  (VEIK). They c o n c l u d e d  its  ceiling  Vocational  Vocational  interventions  The  the  example,  37  i s t o show how  1 9 7 9 ) . A number o f  one  the other  Page 38 authors al., all  (Brown, 1972; D o l l i v e r & Hansen, 1977; O ' N e i l e t  1979; T a k a i  & Holland,  r e i t e r a t e that  influence,  while  1979; T a l b o t  & Birk,  1979)  t h e SDS has d e s i r a b l e  t h e y do n o t know how o r why t h e s e e f f e c t s a r e  achieved. In summary, intervention and  i s encouraging,  d e t a i l e d enough p i c t u r e  career is  while the evidence  counselling.  required  to inform  and g e n e r a l  SDS m i g h t s t i m u l a t e of d i f f e r e n t k i n d s  career  a s an outcome. More  exploration,  planning.  s t u d y seems t o be n e e d e d , one t h a t c o m p r e h e n s i v e l y and s p e c i f i c a l l y  incidents  technique  process events that i n each  of  but  A d i f f e r e n t kind of  would c l a r i f y more  how e a c h  intervention  Using the c r i t i c a l 1954) t o  categorize  f a c i l i t a t e or h i n d e r c a r e e r a study that  intervention  be p r e s e n t e d  explorations  i n relation to  contributes  i n the f o l l o w i n g  planning  seems c a p a b l e o f  a more c o m p r e h e n s i v e and d e t a i l e d  how e a c h  will  planning.  (Flannagan,  intervention,  providing  t h e judgments  f o r d i f f e r e n t purposes  to career  exploration  p r a c t i c e . B o t h CHOICES and t h e  stages of career  contributes  a clear  judgments i n  would be needed t o s u p p o r t  i n counselling  different  i t does not y i e l d  F o r example, s t i m u l a t i n g  extremely abstract  specificity  f o r each  description  to career chapters.  planning  Page  39  CHAPTER 4  Methodology  Subjects S u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d the Career School  P l a n n i n g Course  from v o l u n t e e r s t u d e n t s i n a t Matthew M c N a i r S e n i o r  i n Richmond, B r i t i s h  Columbia.  T h i s s c h o o l i s comprised grade  class  was an o p t i o n a l subjects  school.  families.  mini-course  of the v a r i e d  In the f i r s t  twelve  female)  who  and  varied  who  aspiration The similar  students  had u s e d  somewhat  ethnic composition  from  thirty-five  of students  nature  of the  grade  eleven  male,  level  half  investigation  and l e v e l o f form). involved a  f r o m t h e same s c h o o l .  t h e SDS b u t n o t CHOICES.  of these  was  ( b u t n o t t h e SDS)  (see Appendix D f o r the consent  sampling  The  s t u d y , an a t t e m p t  (approximately half  part of t h i s  course  i n E n g l i s h and were  i n both socio-economic  second  to  t h r e e weeks.  CHOICES r e c e n t l y  However, t h e y had u s e d The  lasting  part of t h i s  made t o g a i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n grade  from middle  1000  This career planning  were a l l v e r y f l u e n t  representive  and  of approximately  11 and 12 s t u d e n t s , m o s t l y  upper-middle  High  s a m p l e s was c o n s t r a i n e d  by t h e v o l u n t e e r a s p e c t o f t h e s t u d y and by  Page 40 other  practical  restrictions.  Critical  Incident  Technique  The  students  were i n t e r v i e w e d  experience incident This  with  eliciting  pioneered  consists basically  reports  or h i n d e r s  central  task  specific high  of concrete  interviewee hindered. system  (1954).  of the i n t e r v i e w e r  and s p e c i f i c  observations  t o determine  what  t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f some p r o c e s s .  of the interviewer  r e p o r t s on c o n c r e t e  points  the c r i t i c a l  by J o h n F l a n a g a n  f r o m p e o p l e who a r e i n a p o s i t i o n helps  their  CHOICES a n d t h e SDS u s i n g  technique,  technique  about  o r low p o i n t s  involves e l i c i t i n g  i n c i d e n t s t h a t were  i n the process.  reported  incidents, a  has p r o v e d  t o be v e r y  very  either  The  must s p e c i f y e x a c t l y what h e l p e d  From t h e s e  The  or category  i s developed.  This reliable.  technique  F o r example, F l a n a g a n  methods f o r c o l l e c t i n g individual  interview,  questionnaires  (1954) r e p o r t s  the data. the group  and r e c o r d  These  incidents  interview,  mailed  forms. In each case, the  forms d i d n o t a l t e r  to a significant  several  include the  s p e c i f i c i t y and e x a c t n e s s o f what happened These v a r i o u s  f l e x i b l e and  i s required.  the q u a l i t y  of the  degree as long as the  Page subjects  were m o t i v a t e d  c a r e f u l l y and answer  to read  i s that d i f f e r e n t  using  interviewers  a v a r i e t y o f t r a i n e d and ranging  A n d e r s s o n and N i l s s o n  significant produced method,  They r e p o r t difference  of the a common  a number o f  untrained  from p s y c h o l o g i s t s  were n o t m a r k e d l y  reliability.  elicit  (1954) r e p o r t s  f o r e m e n w i t h no i n t e r v i e w i n g obtained  t o the r e l i a b i l i t y  interviewers  body o f r e s p o n s e s . F l a n a g a n studies  the i n s t r u c t i o n s  conscientiously.  Another dimension adding technique  to  experience.  industrial  Results  different. (1964) a l s o u n d e r l i n e i t s  that  while  there  was  a  i n t h e number o f i n c i d e n t s  between t h e i n t e r v i e w the rank c o r r e l a t i o n  and t h e  questionnaire  between t h e s i z e s ( i . e .  number o f i n c i d e n t s p e r c a t e g o r y ) o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s .85. the  Also,  there  41  were no s i g n i f i c a n t  number o f i n c i d e n t s e l i c i t e d  differences  by t h e  was  between  various  interviewers. The t e c h n i q u e a p p e a r s r e l i a b l e trustworthiness various  through d i f f e r e n t  Reliability glance,  of i t s procedure e i t h e r through the  ways o f c o l l e c t i n g  incidents  a rather  referring  i n view of the  the data or the e l i c i t i n g interviewers.  o f c a t e g o r i z a t i o n seems, a t subjective  first  p r o c e d u r e . However,  to the source m a t e r i a l ,  the essence  by  i s to  of  Page a s c e r t a i n a c a t e g o r y system that (1954) n o t e s t h a t to  one  rule  i s obvious. Flanagan  i s t o submit the  o t h e r s f o r r e v i e w . A n d e r s s o n and  categories  Nilsson  (1964)  c o n d u c t e d an e x p e r i m e n t t o d e t e r m i n e whether could  produce  working  similar  in pairs,  T h e r e was  independently developed  indicating a plausible  extent  t o which  incidents The tested  categorization  validity  formed,  t h a t was  not too  categorization by t e s t i n g  the  i t to categorize  way. of the c r i t i c a l  by A n d e r s s o n and  whether  a  for r e l i a b i l i t y  o t h e r s c a n use  t h e same  categories.  on t h e c a t e g o r i e s  However, more d i r e c t l y ,  scheme c a n be c h e c k e d  others  c a t e g o r i e s . Twenty-four s t u d e n t s ,  l a r g e agreement  subjective.  Nilsson  the technique succeeds  incident  (1964) by  technique  i n i n c l u d i n g a l l the  p r o c e s s . They a n a l y z e d the  c o n t e n t s of the t r a i n i n g  literature  the  a n a l y s i s and  be  fitted  really in  therefore  (1964) was critical.  relation  which  internal  was  whether  That  sound,  the  i s , do  f r o m one  general,  studied  perspective.  by A n d e r s s o n  incidents collected  judges f i n d  c a t e g o r i e s were r a t e d  and  were  them i m p o r t a n t  t o t h e work? T h e y d e s i g n e d r a t i n g  eighty-six  In  i n t o the c a t e g o r y system of  Another a s p e c t of v a l i d i t y Nilsson  f o r the  o f managers o v e r a number o f y e a r s .  data could  was  verifying  i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s o f one  training  42  forms i n  on a s i x p o i n t  Page 4 3 scale  by t h r e e h u n d r e d  people  s t o r e managers, a s s i s t a n t s , They c o n c l u d e d t h a t may store  be  that  manager as  only five  some w a r r a n t  for believing  that  t o the o c c u p a t i o n  the  claim, requiring  question: Valid  is reliable  noted  f o r what? The  aim  of t h i s  Interview  presumption  required to  to  is a  the i s to of  fully  validity.  Procedures  individual  i n t e r v i e w s began by  the s t u d e n t w i t h the nature withdraw, c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y c o u n s e l l i n g and (Appendix  be  study  p l a n s and  were a s k e d .  and  q u e s t i o n s about  h i s or h e r  Then, e a c h  right  the normal a c c e s s  other school s e r v i c e s  D). General  familiarizing  o f t h e s t u d y . The  to  was  emphasized  the  student's  e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h CHOICES  s t u d e n t was  given  these  by  there i s  that v a l i d i t y  v a r i o u s answers t o  Future s t u d i e s w i l l  demonstrate  and  information gathered  categories with a reasonable  The  of  information collected  technique  However, i t must be  complicated  validity.  units  of the e i g h t y - s i x c a t e g o r i e s  i t appears  incident  career  psychology students).  t h e method r e v e a l e d b e h a v i o r  the c r i t i c a l  develop  superiors,  unimportant.  Therefore,  valid.  and  considered important  were r a t e d  be  (including  to  Page  44  instructions: Think  back t o y o u r  filling  out  experience  the T r a v e l Guide,  computer t e r m i n a l , and Try  to  with  identify  those  working a t  s t u d y i n g the positive  taking  f o r your  the  first  Once t h e was  altered  career  high point, t e l l  to e l i c i t  s p e c i f y e x a c t l y how With the s t u d e n t ' s  were  so h e l p f u l  negative  an  he  low  or she  Now,  me  exactly  at that  the  the  permission,  helped  these  h o u r , were t a p e  time.  question hindered  student  or h i n d e r e d was  was  points that  incident,  e x a c t l y what h e l p e d  approximately  felt  h i g h p o i n t s were e x h a u s t e d ,  p l a n n i n g . For each  specified  printout.  career planning.  what happened t h a t was  the  high-points in  w h i c h s o m e t h i n g happened t h a t you important  CHOICES:  and or  tried  hindered.  interviews,  recorded  to  and/or  lasting notes  taken. E x a c t l y the  obtaining  same p r o c e d u r e  incidents concerning  the major q u e s t i o n s t h a t e i t h e r reference  criteria  each r e p o r t e d  was SDS  a s CHOICES. Below a r e  were a s k e d  for determining  incident:  followed i n  or s e r v e d  the completeness  as of  Page 45 What e x a c t l y happened t h a t career  planning?  Why was t h i s  Data  was s o h e l p f u l f o r y o u r  s o h e l p f u l t o you?  Analysis  Once t h e i n t e r v i e w s were d i v i d e d career  i n t o items t h a t  planning.  approach  were c o m p l e t e d , t h e s e characterize  Similar to Lazwell's  a  incidents  t h e i m p a c t on  posteriori  ( H e r z b e r g e t a l . , 1966) whereby t h e c a t e g o r i e s  of a n a l y s i s a r e e x t r a c t e d incidents  were d i v i d e d  from the m a t e r i a l  into categories  itself,  based  on  item  similarity. To  assure r e l i a b i l i t y  judges placed appropriate of  one h u n d r e d and f i f t y  categories.  80% o f t h e i n c i d e n t s  that  i t is reliable  80%,  categories  a g r e e m e n t was  of c a t e g o r i z a t i o n ,  three  i n c i d e n t s each  W i t h a n a g r e e m e n t o f a minimum (Flanagan,  1954), the assumption  c a n be made. I f a g r e e m e n t were  would have t o be r e f r a m e d  reached.  under  until  below  better  Page  46  CHAPTER 5  Results  Previous  outcome r e s e a r c h has  adequate d e s c r i p t i o n facilitates  o f how  each  c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . In an a t t e m p t detailed  study  individual  that  focused  helped  upon  or h i n d e r e d  students generated task  categorization  adequate d e s c r i p t i v e  i n c i d e n t s may considerations  be  events  map  each  was  the  present  events seventy  incidents.  i n a more  intervention  made o f  of  primary  c a t e g o r i e s are the it  purpose  of  (Flanagan,  frame o f r e f e r e n c e f o r  the programs f a c i l i t a t e d  i s , to  find  or h i n d e r e d  career  i n t h e CHOICES T r a v e l  Guide,  must s p e c i f i c a l l y  The  reliable  program e v a l u a t i o n , t h a t  example,  a  planning.  t h e u s e s t o be  categorization  aptitude,  usable  that result  o f how  i n forming  study,  students  of  c a t e g o r i z e d . U s u a l l y , the  1 9 5 4 ) . In t h i s  p l a n n i n g . For  accounts  the  numerous ways i n w h i c h a c o l l e c t i o n  c a t e g o r i z a t i o n and  o u t how  o f 776  or h i n d e r s c a r e e r  There are  description,  i s to present a  of these  an  to provide  c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . The  a total  of the c h a p t e r  facilitates  provided  intervention  more c o m p r e h e n s i v e and has  not  state  temperament, e d u c a t i o n  their  interests,  l e v e l and  s o on.  Are  Page 47 these  self-ratings  m e r e l y a means o f p r e p a r i n g  computer  t e r m i n a l o r do t h e y  as  I t i s "What h a p p e n s " when one c a r r i e s  well?  activity  such  From t h i s  as t h i s ,  b e t t e r prepare  students  selection,  interventions  of t h i s  study.  of categories  the s e l e c t i o n  through  and t h e  subjectively  of the i n t e r v e n t i o n s ,  for individualized  p r e p a r a t i o n and l a t e r  might a l s o guide  o u t an  f o r CHOICES  from  b e n e f i t s and d e t r i m e n t s  would seem c r i t i c a l  planning  a map o f e a c h p r o g r a m s o a s t o h e l p  SDS. T h e s e c a t e g o r i e s , f i l t e r e d construed  career  i s the focus  p e r s p e c t i v e , the types  s o u g h t would p r o v i d e counsellors  that  facilitate  f o r the  treatment  counselling. This  map  of a p p r o p r i a t e  a qualitative  comparison  of the  programs. A m a j o r p a r t o f c a t e g o r i z a t i o n was t h e s e a r c h f o r prototypes.  These a r e c l e a r  These p r o t o t y p e s serve  with a prototype,  category.  (Rosch, To order  category.  f e a t u r e s which  The more f e a t u r e s a member  t h e more i t f i t s  w i t h i n the  T h e s e n a t u r a l c a t e g o r i e s do n o t have  boundaries, together  of a  encompass t h e c r i t i c a l  to define a category.  shares  examplars  b u t r a t h e r a r e more open, b e i n g  rigid  held  more by common f e a t u r e s o r f a m i l y r e s e m b l a n c e 1977). initiate  the c a t e g o r i z a t i o n procedure  t o g e t a sense of the complexity  and i n  of the data, a l l  Page incidents  were r e a d c a r e f u l l y .  differentiated similarity  T h e y were  into various p i l e s  of content.  48  then  according to  A prototype  was  identified for  each p i l e  and t h e i n c i d e n t s  necessary  around each p r o t o t y p e . P r o v i s i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s  were t h u s  formed and p r o b l e m s  with to  other  people  were r e c l a s s i f i e d  and f u r t h e r  where  identified. Consultation adjustments  were r e q u i r e d  s o l i d i f y the c a t e g o r i e s or r e s o l v e problems.  cycles  were n e c e s s a r y  to achieve  Several  a s a t i s f a c t o r y s e t of  categories. First  the i n c i d e n t s  from  t h e CHOICES g r o u p were  examined by p r o v i d i n g a p r o t o t y p e range of i n c i d e n t s  and by d e s c r i b i n g t h e  i n v o l v e d . The c a t e g o r i e s were  listed  under t h r e e h e a d i n g s :  other.  In the f a c i l i t a t i v e i n c i d e n t s ,  expressed  how  facilitated outlines  their  who  sense  c a r e e r p l a n n i n g was h e l p e d o r  per category,  incidents  c a t e g o r i e s and a l s o  will  the students  1 (on page  the f a c i l i t a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s . Included  expressed  category.  f a c i l i t a t i v e , h i n d e r i n g and  by t h e CHOICES p r o g r a m . T a b l e  number o f i n c i d e n t s  then  50)  a r e the  t h e number o f s t u d e n t s  subsumed by t h e v a r i o u s  the percentage  of students  f o r each  R e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y o f t h e s e c a t e g o r i e s  be d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r of t h e i r  independent  7. However, one c a n g e t a  v a l i d i t y by n o t i n g  observers  ( i n Table  r e p o r t t h e same t y p e s  1) t h a t of events.  Page 49 In t h i s As  c a s e , s u b j e c t s were t h e i n d e p e n d e n t c a n be o b s e r v e d  c a t e g o r i e s a r e grouped  i n Table under  observers.  1, t h e t h i r t e e n  three  basic  headings:  O c c u p a t i o n a l awareness, s e l f - a w a r e n e s s  and m a t c h . T h i s  i s s i m p l y one way t o o r g a n i z e t h e t h i r t e e n c a t e g o r i e s that  seems p l a u s i b l e  underpinnings  and r e f l e c t s  o f CHOICES' a u t h o r .  the t h e o r e t i c a l I t would be  however, t o a s s i g n undue i m p o r t a n c e  to these  s u p e r o r d i n a t e c a t e g o r i e s . The m a j o r t h r u s t research  i s f o c u s e d on t h e t h i r t e e n  mistaken,  of t h i s  categories that  a c t u a l l y subsume t h e i n c i d e n t s . Appendix F o f f e r s types  a detailed  of c a t e g o r i e s each  the sex, grade outlines  and age o f e a c h  the type  participated  student  of student  i n each  tabulation expressed,  along  with  s t u d e n t . Appendix G  (sex, grade,  category.  of the  age) t h a t  Page Table  1  CHOICES F a c i l i t a t i v e  Categories Incidents  A. O c c u p a t i o n a l  educational  requirements 2. Expands g e n e r a l 3. Expands  job options  job options  specific 4. Narrows  focus  5. S t i m u l a t e s  work f e a t u r e s questions  7. J u d g e s f u t u r e o f j o b s  future  16 (46%)  25  19 (54%)  23  17 ( 4 9 % )  16  14 (43%)  35  24 (69%)  17  17 (49%)  16  14 (43%)  16  16 (46%)  14  11 (31%)  6  4 (11%)  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of  6. Answers s p e c i f i c  8. P r o v i d e s  24  in a  field  extrinsic  *Students (%)**  Awareness  1. C o n s i d e r s  B.  50  reference f o r  planning  Self-Awareness 9. C l a r i f i e s 10. C l a r i f i e s and  likes capabilities  aptitudes  C. Match 11. M a t c h e s aptitudes  i n t e r e s t s and t o jobs  7  5 (14%)  Page 51 12.  Confirmation  of choice  13.  Disconfirmation of choice  TOTAL  Number o f s t u d e n t s category Percentage  11 ( 3 1 % )  6  6 (17%)  218  who e x p r e s s e d  (maximum 3 5 ) . i s based  13  over  35.  this  type of  Page Of  the  following category  m a j o r i t y are  in a specific  options  in a specified  student.  Further  each c a t e g o r y elaborate  these  will  be  facilitating  Considers The  are  enumerated  not  r a t h e r by by  p o r t r a y i n g the  level  i t shows you  really how  much  of  education  then  train  I want what  needed t o become a t e a c h e r . ( S t u d e n t  G e n e r a l l y , most o f t h e  preconceived  range  helped  w o r k i n g . CHOICES l i s t e d  j o b was  to you #22)  incidents in this  t h a t knowing t h e  Some f o u n d  an  requirements:  maybe 1 more y e a r ,  career.  Therefore,  Categories  educational  for a  Job  providing  for  education  job  the  so much by  have t o commit t o . I want t o  acknowledged  for  seems r e d u n d a n t .  you  start  "Expands  means e x a c t l y t h a t .  presented, but  example,  i n c i d e n t s f o r CHOICES.  educational  because  area  e x a m p l e s and  CHOICES F a c i l i t a t i v e  1.  field"  explication  explanation  prototypical  d e s c r i p t i o n s , the  s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . For  options  52  level  helpful  i t helpful  category  of t r a i n i n g  in planning  or  their  b e c a u s e t h e y a l r e a d y had  i d e a o f what c a r e e r  they  wanted  and  a  Page 53 therefore of  needed  education  i n f o r m a t i o n on e x a c t l y how many  was r e q u i r e d . O t h e r s ,  example a b o v e , wanted t o t r a i n more t h a n working. they  a specified If their  were r e a d y  amount o f t i m e a n d t h e n t o o k more  both,  in their  career  to a  I t seemed  itself; for  that least  director.  of ideas that jobs  like  i t gave me t h e o p p o r t u n i t y  wanted, I c o u l d .  I never  stewardess,  T h e r e was a l o t o f j o b s  I d i d n ' t want t o g e t i n t o ,  made me t h i n k  I t was h e l p f u l  of other  things  but a t that  was c o n c e r n e d  that  i n a general  with  i f I  because i t I might  i f t h i n g s d o n ' t work o u t . ( S t u d e n t  This category  was  planning.  thought about b e f o r e , cruise  requirements  job options  I t gave me a c o u p l e  options  ideal  t h e l e n g t h o f p r e p a r a t i o n was p a r a m o u n t . F o r  Expands g e n e r a l  do  start  time-consuming t r a i n i n g .  t h e knowledge o f t h e t r a i n i n g  helpful  f o r no  training,  and w i l l i n g t o reduce t h e i r  f o r some t h e p r i o r i t y was t h e c a r e e r  others,  2.  the f i r s t  o r go t o s c h o o l  aspired career  more m a n a g e a b l e , l e s s that  like  years  #32)  expanding job  way a s o p p o s e d t o l i s t i n g  jobs  ina  Page specific was  area.  facilitated  printout, ignored  3.  Students  Expands  it  not  considered  had,  through  was  kinds  b e c a u s e you  of s i m i l a r  pediatricians, you  can  look  surgeons  because  into  gained  lists  or hadn't c o n s i d e r e d . general category,  a r e a was  helpful  felt  that  other  also  have s o m e t h i n g t o not  available  doctors, jobs.  i n case  So  you  don't  #27)  jobs that they  occupations  had  ignored  T h i s expansion  limited  j o b s would be fall  i n case  in  in a specific because  by o n l y one  possible.  back on  more  were c o n c e n t r a t e d  to t h e i r career planning  t h a t t h e y were n o t similar  like  (Student  of  specific fields.  found  into a l l  However, d i f f e r i n g f r o m t h e  these  they  was  way.  other  This i s  - similar  t h i n k o f many o t h e r s  Students  or two  look  occupations  want t o go a l l t h e  one  can  had  field  things that are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d . helpful  the  beforehand.  helpful  a chance to  planning  that they e i t h e r  in a specific  occupations  g i v e s you  now  range of o p t i o n s  job options  Similar  that their career  because t h e y  a wider  or had  felt  54  job,  T h e y would one  or p r a c t i c a l . T h i s c a t e g o r y  career was  Page 55 particularly  h e l p f u l t o those  occupational  field  RELATED 4.  who a l r e a d y knew t h e i r  and would t h e n a c c e s s  routes.  Narrows  focus  CHOICES n a r r o w e d down t h e j o b s . is  h e l p f u l because  i t narrowed  This i t down  t o a few t o p i c s , i t p i c k s c e r t a i n that  The perceived  you're  direction  fields  i n t e r e s t e d i n . (Student  e s s e n t i a l feature helpfulness  occupations  like  t h e COMPARE o r  of t h i s  #26)  category  i s the  o f narrowing t h e range o f  to c e r t a i n areas  towards a c a r e e r .  and t h e r e f o r e o b t a i n i n g a Most o f t h e i n c i d e n t s were  t h e example a b o v e . However, a n o t h e r  m e n t i o n e d was t h e c a s e o f c h o i c e  feature  when f a c e d  with  fewer  options.  5.  Stimulates  The  the  work  i n s i d e / o u t s i d e c o n s i d e r a t i o n was  helpful like  consideration of e x t r i n s i c  because  i t made me  a librarian time,  closely.  where y o u ' r e  i t made me l o o k (Student  look  #20)  at a job  inside a l l  a t i t more  features  Page 56 The  relatively  encompassed Earnings,  large  in this  category  h o u r s o f work  or o u t s i d e ,  activities features helpful first  considerations  l o c a t i o n of residence,  as being  The c o n s i d e r a t i o n  others  stated,  stimulated  by a c t u a l l y d o i n g  seeing  these e x t r i n s i c  the T r a v e l  affected their  questions  t h e CCDO number and g e t a l o t o f  t h e CHOICES  were  printout.  in  on a s p e c i f i c  category  that  G u i d e and t h e n  was h e l p f u l t o be a b l e  This  was  f o r example, t h a t " i f  It  information  work  i t was t h e most  These c o n s i d e r a t i o n s  how t h e s e c h o i c e s  Answers s p e c i f i c  work  p r a c t i c a l and  a j o b you r e a l l y want, t h e money won't be but h e l p s " .  of  physical  most o f t e n m e n t i o n e d  Some m e n t i o n e d t h a t  while  working  i n a j o b . F o r many, i t was t h e  important,  6.  important,  t i m e t h e y had c o n t e m p l a t e d  important  range.  work, t r a v e l  and demands, a l l o f t h e s e e x t r i n s i c  "earnings".  it's  formed an e x t e n s i v e  environmental conditions,  were r e p o r t e d  features.  of i n c i d e n t s  including shift  (commuter and p l e a s u r e ) , inside  number  illustrated  to simply  type  j o b . (Student  #21)  t h e s p e e d and  specificity  system. A f t e r completing  t h e EXPLORE  Page route, with  the s t u d e n t s  armed w i t h a l i s t  t h e a c c o m p a n y i n g CCDO number. C a r e e r  facilitated the  would be  because they c o u l d then  S P E C I F I C r o u t e and  varying  from  get  the e a r n i n g s  jobs  planning  access  fourteen types t o what t y p e s  of  these of  of  57  was  through  information  attitudes  were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .  7.  Judges  f u t u r e of  Future had  outlook  never  jobs  was  really  knowing whether increasing  was  want t o g e t future.  because  about  stable  i t and or  good, b e c a u s e you  don't no  #10)  i n c i d e n t s were s i m i l a r future outlook  of a  considered b e n e f i c i a l  i t i s r e a s s u r i n g and  planning.  because I  i n t o s o m e t h i n g t h a t has  a b o v e . Knowing t h e o c c u p a t i o n was  thought i t was  (Student  Most o f t h e  helpful  to the certain  i n career  i t permits  prototype  planning  strategic  Page 8.  Provides  Taking able  reference  t h e p r i n t o u t home and  t o read  helpful about is  i t , to think  i t a l l a t once w h i l e away.  of possessing  printout  provides  the  fails  about  i t is  (Student  t h e computer #25)  the a c t u a l p r i n t o u t .  a future  reference  given  by t h e c o m p u t e r .  I t a l s o seems t thorough  deliberation.  The  interests  T r a v e l G u i d e was h e l p f u l b e c a u s e i t  n a r r o w e d down my  i n t e r e s t s by  making you t h i n k  a b o u t where y o u want  to head. L i k e could not.  work  (Student  really  i t would a s k y o u i f y o u  in a stressful #9)  present  from memorizing  a s i n t h e c a s e a b o v e , a more  9. C l a r i f i e s  This  i f their  and a l s o f r e e s t h e s t u d e n t  information  stimulate,  being  i n c i d e n t s a r e mainly concerned with the  benefits  plan  planning  b e c a u s e y o u d o n ' t have t o t h i n k  rattling  These  for future  s i t u a t i o n or  59  Page The clarify test  interest likes  taken  helping  i n the T r a v e l Guide  and d i s l i k e s .  helped  A l s o , some m e n t i o n e d t h e  i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r CHOICES was b e n e f i c i a l i n  them g a i n s e l f - a w a r e n e s s  distinguishing to  factors  this category  jobs" category,  of t h e i r  from  interests  In  t h e "Matches i n t e r e s t  i t i s important  c a t e g o r y does not l i n k  interests.  t o note  that  this  t o an a c t u a l  occupation.  10.  Clarifies  Choices what  capabilities  was h e l p f u l  high school students  that  because  i t showed  I c a n do and c a n ' t d o . ( S t u d e n t  Lack o f e x p e r i e n c e  factor  and a p t i t u d e s  in eliminating  #21)  on t h e p a r t o f most o f t h e s e  coupled  w i t h t h e power o f t h i s  job p o s s i b i l i t i e s  has r e q u i r e d  the c o u n s e l l o r s preparing the students  f o r CHOICES,  d o w n p l a y t h e a p t i t u d e and temperament f a c t o r s Travel  Guide.  Consequently,  only 6 incidents  r e v e a l e d . T h e s e were c o n c e r n e d  mostly  with  i n the were  f i n d i n g out  what one c a n a c t u a l l y do and c a n ' t d o . S i m i l a r previous category,  t h e r e was  no j o b l i n k  t o the  involved.  Page 11.  Matches  It  i n t e r e s t s and  helped  that  t o see  the  different  I have t o d e a l w i t h .  helpful a  me  aptitudes to  b e c a u s e you  job that s u i t s  abilities.  This  have t o  your  (Student  few  planning.  S i m i l a r to the  12.  Confirmation  of  of  my  choice  by  print-out  i d e a s by  a  the  i n . (Student  i t . The  things  I  to the  was  student's  machine-like,  a certain  agreed  confirmation  #19)  added w e i g h t  also affixed t o the  career  framed.  w e l l as  listing  confirming  satisfaction  to  choice  worked r e a l l y  This category  importance  this  example a b o v e , most i n c i d e n t s  sharply  It  interested  and  incidents in  considering i t s general  not  is  #18)  category,  and  areas  choose  interests  T h e r e were s u r p r i s i n g l y  were g e n e r a l  jobs  upon  prestige  prior  errorless and  occupations.  60  Page 13.  Disconfirmation  The  of  computer was  proved  t o me  that  choice  helpful  I've I've  a nurse.  my  b e c a u s e o n l y one  n u r s e came up  and  were t e a c h i n g  jobs. Also  well  the  of the  CHOICES H i n d e r i n g  As  f o r the  clarification  and  i n the  knowing t h e  doing  p r o d u c e d by prior  hindering  didn't  testing  this  choice.  i n c i d e n t s i n CHOICES, a Most s t u d e n t s as  h e l p as  o r were s i m p l y  such, but much a s  useless  did  not  rather  others.  irrelevant.  information.  For of  that  Certain  improvement  inside/outside considerations  t o some s t u d e n t s ,  #7)  Categories  p r o g r a m were i n need o f  clarification,  jobs  biology.(Student  student's  i s necessary.  aspects  not  of  through r e a l i t y  was  a c t u a l l y express a hindrance certain  type  of the  I'm  outcome e i t h e r  expansion of o p t i o n s  disconfirmation  changed  rest  in chemistry  A positive  areas  always  wanted t o be  very  or an  because i t  I w o u l d n ' t make a  good n u r s e e v e n t h o u g h  mind now,  61  and  example, jobs  It really  was, didn't  Page "hinder"  their  facilitate of  the  detail  career  i t either.  planning Table  but  2 p o r t r a y s the  9 h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s and the  participation  i t didn't  of the  really  frequencies  A p p e n d i x F and  individual  G  students.  62  Page 63 Table  2  CHOICES H i n d e r i n g  Categories Incidents  A.  *Students**  (%)  INFORMATION 1. l a c k o f i n f o r m a t i o n  11  8 (23%)  2. u s e l e s s  17  13 ( 3 7 % )  information  3. u n r e l i a b l e  occupational  information  3  3 (9%)  B. OPTIONS 4. f a i l s  to confirm a  prior  choice  7  6 (17%)  6  6 (17%)  9  8 (23%)  6  6 (17%)  4  4 (11%)  9. m a c h i n e m a l f u n c t i o n  1  1 ( 3%)  TOTAL  65  5. p u z z l i n g and i n a p p r o p r i a t e job options 6. q u e s t i o n a b l e narrowing  basis f o r  jobs  7. n e e d s more o p t i o n s  C.  TERMINAL 8. r u s h e d  *  on t e r m i n a l  Number o f s t u d e n t s category  who e x p r e s s e d  (Maximum 35)  this  type of  Page is  ** P e r c e n t a g e In t h e  based  over  same manner a s  the  c a t e g o r i e s are  and  a range of i n c i d e n t s .  1.  Lack o f  not  get  "teacher  I could  not  get  a l l the  wanted.  (Student  the  universities  places  jobs  p r o t o t y p i c a l example  the  can  be  because  of the  blind",  information  I  y i e l d e d numerous gaps o f career  information  planning,  have p r o d u c e d a  c o l l e g e s with  the  subjects courses  obtainable  of having  t o a l l the  according  CHOICES c o u l d  needed  t o be  necessary after  high  to choose a occupations  accepted  of  into  to graduate, a school,  the  just  the  longer  actual  jobs  p r o v i n c e ) , and not  list  corresponding  o f employment, a Canada-wide bank o f  (instead access  and  the  university, of  categories,  #8)  have f a c i l i t a t e d  students.  faculties,  a  is frustrating  I could  could  facilitating  as  presented  This  This category  list  the  s t a r r e d occupations  accessed.  to  35  information  Only the  that  64  complete  s t a r r e d ones.  Page 2.  Useless  The  information  inside/outside considerations  useless. to  work  These category  You a l r e a d y  (Student  incidents are contrary  "stimulated  considerations,  were  know i f you a r e g o i n g  i n s i d e or o u t s i d e .  features". Features  to the  #14)  facilitative  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of e x t r i n s i c  work  such as i n s i d e / o u t s i d e  temperament, a p t i t u d e s ,  environment, t r a v e l ,  interest,  l o c a t i o n o f employment,  future  outlook,  earnings,  p h y s i c a l demands and e d u c a t i o n d i d  not  seem  important  or f a c i l i t a t i v e  for  these  3.  Unreliable occupational  How  can they  This category  was  planning  was  information  supposed  t o be s t a b l e  f o r e s t r y - and i t ' s n o t s t a b l e  now.  outdated  to career  students.  The f u t u r e o u t l o o k for  65  say that?  contains  (Student  e s p e c i a l l y true concerning outlook.  #24)  i n c i d e n t s r e v o l v i n g around  and u n r e l i a b l e o c c u p a t i o n a l  employment  right  information.  This  s a l a r y l e v e l s and  F o r example, CHOICES l i s t s  $5000. a s  Page 66 a  level  o f s a l a r y . Who would c h o o s e a j o b w h i c h  below t h e p o v e r t y  4.  Fails  level?  to confirm  I feel  a prior  i t ' s not that  because  I already  t o do. I t d i d n ' t and  that  dissappointed  know what I wanted come o u t a s a  f i n d i n g f o r me.  Contrary  t o the f a c i l i t a t i v e  non-facilitative student  (Student  of p r i o r choice" as a f a i r  aspect  #34)  category where t h e s t u d e n t s reality  t e s t , most o f  t h e d i s a p p o i n t m e n t and of the confirmation  failure.  went a s f a r a s t o f u d g e t h e d a t a u n t i l  succeeded  5.  I t wasn't  a career  incidents stressed  pilot  and I was  about t h a t .  viewed d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n these  choice  h e l p f u l t o me  was d e p r e s s i n g  "Disconfirmation  i n getting h i s prior  Puzzling  and i n a p p r o p r i a t e  Some o f t h e j o b s This  I didn't  wasn't r e a l l y  didn't  pays  choice.  job options  find  appealing.  h e l p f u l because i t  i n t e r e s t me. L i k e  things  I know I  he  One  Page 67 c o u l d n ' t d o . L i k e n u r s i n g . Not b e c a u s e of t h e e d u c a t i o n a l f a c t o r of the s i g h t (Student  The ranged  I'd k e e l  over.  #32)  puzzlement  as expressed  i n these  incidents  f r o m w o n d e r i n g what t h e c o n n e c t i o n was between  seemingly options, did  of blood,  but because  d i v e r g e n t j o b s , t o not wanting t o being confused  not l i k e  their  t o widen  a s t o what t o do n e x t  their i f they  list.  I n a p p r o p r l a t e n e s s was a l s o a k e y i n g r e d i e n t a s evidenced tried  6.  b y t h e ' p r o t o t y p e above and b y h a v i n g a l r e a d y  some o f t h e l i s t e d  Questionable  I found  b a s i s f o r narrowing  that  so d e f i n i t e , jobs, in. it  The  because that  (Student  jobs  the questions are  t h a t maybe I would be  was r e a l l y  them.  I c u t out a l o t of  So i t s h o u l d ' v e  jobs.  j o b s and n o t l i k i n g  easy  interested  been t o l d  t o us t h a t  to c u t out a l o t of  #25)  p r e v a l e n t theme  i n these  i n c i d e n t s was one o f  w o n d e r i n g how e x a c t l y t h e computer worked t o n a r r o w down  Page the  j o b s . E i t h e r through m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of d i r e c t i o n s ,  u n c e r t a i n t y of how everything  was  T h e y seem t o computer  7.  68  too g e n e r a l ,  Needed more  i t would be  of  to  into secretarial,  me  complete.  This category  awhile  2  and  they  I  want do?  I t wasn't  have o f f e r e d  of o c c u p a t i o n s . ( S t u d e n t  is typified have no  want a w i d e r  d e s i r e t o be  planning  but  indicate a more a  job  narrowed  range of o c c u p a t i o n s  hindrance  career  #4)  by a demand f o r more  T h i s does not  to t h e i r  to  I don't  more r e l a t e d o c c u p a t i o n s .  facilitation.  the  types  what w i l l  It could  These s t u d e n t s  down. R a t h e r  hampered.  facilitative.  have u s e d more c h o i c e s .  more t y p e s  options.  felt  more knowledge o f  I d o n ' t want  music a f t e r  quite  that  that helpful  teach  I could  students  more  i t o n l y o f f e r e d me  j o b s . Because, say  go  feeling  options  i t wasn't r e a l l y  because  the  i n d i c a t e that with  functions  But  t o answer, or a  lack  or real of  Page 69 8.  Rushed  on t e r m i n a l  I d i d n ' t have enough computer the  terminal to r e a l l y get a l l  i n f o r m a t i o n on a l l t h e j o b s I  wanted. S h o u l d  be a l l o w e d  time as you need.  The t h r e e rushed  feeling,  facilitative  Machine  implying  to career  that  i f they  communicated  would have had  i t would have been more  planning.  p r i n t o u t got stuck  i t p r i n t e d over  a hindrance!  was t h e o n l y  malfunction. planning.  category  malfunction  therefore  This  #2)  incidents in this  The computer  Quite  a s much  (Student  more t i m e on t h e t e r m i n a l  9.  t i m e on t h e  (Student  incident  itself. #5)  o f a machine  N a t u r a l l y i t was n o t c o n d u c i v e  to career  a  Page 70 SDS F a c i l i t a t i v e  The  Categories  SDS f a c i l i t a t i v e  categories will  same way a s CHOICES. T a b l e the of  14 f a c i l i t a t i v e incidents  expressed and  also  expressed  i n each  t h e number o f s t u d e n t s  of students  the types  and A p p e n d i x  participated  the f r e q u e n c i e s of  who  subsumed by t h e v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s  the percentage  Appendix H o u t l i n e s  3 outlines  i n the  c a t e g o r i e s . I n c l u d e d a r e t h e number  per c a t e g o r y ,  incidents  be p r e s e n t e d  category.  of c a t e g o r i e s each  I, the type  category.  f o r each  of student  who  student  Page 71 Table  3  spg F a c u l t a t i v e  categories Incidents  A. OCCUPATIONAL 1. C o n s i d e r s  *Students**  AWARENESS educational  requirements  15  14 ( 4 0 % )  57  29 ( 8 3 % )  11  8 (23%)  42  21 ( 6 0 % )  2  2 ( 6%)  2. E x p a n d s g e n e r a l j o b options 3. E x p a n d s j o b o p t i o n s i n a specific  field  4. Narrows f o c u s 5. G u i d e s  information  search B.  SELF-AWARENESS 6. C o n f i r m s o r c l a r i f i e s and  likes  dislikes  28  19 ( 5 4 % )  31  23 ( 6 6 % )  14  12 ( 3 4 % )  7. C o n f i r m s o r d i s c o v e r s c a p a b i l i t i e s or incapabilities 8. S t i m u l a t e s  deliberation  9. U n d e r s t a n d i n g  oneself  time  over 8  8 (23%)  17  12 ( 3 4 % )  10. F i n d o u t where t o improve  (%)  MATCH 11. M a t c h e s to  capabilities  jobs  12. M a t c h e s to  17  (49%)  22  11  (31%)  8  6  (17%)  18  13  (37%)  interest  jobs  13. M a t c h e s  interest  capabilities 14. C o n f i r m s  or  and  to jobs justifies  choice  TOTAL  Number o f s t u d e n t s  298  who  expressed  category. Percentage  25  i s based  over  35.  this  type  of  Page 1.  Considers  educational  educational level  occupation  was  get  helpful  work f i r s t  the  to plan  to the  misconceptions  financial  at  h i g h s c h o o l or c o l l e g e  planning  CHOICES c a t e g o r y ,  while  you  time  #47)  importance  requirments  aiding  training  enough money t o  conveys the  or t r a i n i n g  from c o r r e c t i n g  the  you  need. I t h e l p s  i n c i d e n t s were s i m i l a r  the  i t helps  f o r your s c h o o l i n g . (Student  This category educational  you  the  - whether  to get  education  by  because  to plan f i n a n c i a l l y  should  the  requirements  Having the  you  of knowing  f o r a j o b . Most  example above  to avoiding  some s t u d e n t s  as a p r i o r i t y  o t h e r s were p r e p a r e d  i n choosing to t r a i n  courses  Also, similar valued  as  an  Expands g e n e r a l  Occupations  job  length  o f what m i g h t be because  i t g i v e s me  long  available.  i t g i v e s me  This  an  as  idea  is helpful  a better outlook,  to of  occupation  options  section:  of  surprises,  or h e l p i n g t o c h o o s e level.  the  ranging  necessary.  2.  73  a  Page wider  range of o p t i o n s . The  i t gave me  them down on p a p e r .  to  do  I don't  after  b l a c k and  my  time  T h i s was  travelling  white.  get  new  t h e most  I can't  - I can skate  when I d i d do  lot  more o c c u p a t i o n s . way  Occupations you  would  do,  not  This  like  find  of  letters  (Student  #48) the  because  a  #47)  q u e s t i o n i s worded i n i t says  an  interesting  or would  don't  like  to  do  this. up  career,  This  that I  of b e f o r e .  (Student  This category,  with a r e l a t i v e l y q u i t e an  do.  really  lifelong  opens v a r i o u s f i e l d s  r e p o r t e d , had  that  would a c t u a l l y  b e c a u s e you  i t i n terms of a  occupation  hadn't thought  incidents  of  t h a t . I a l s o got  r a t h e r o f would you  really  in  occupations  s o m e t h i n g t h a t you  is helpful  think but  the  this  (Student  helpful  interesting  me)  see  forever. I  back on.  c o d e s was  (to  The  to write  helpful  Being a b l e to s w i t c h the code and  list  r e a l l y know what I want  need s o m e t h i n g t o f a l l  I got  #56)  d a y d r e a m s e c t i o n made me  opportunities,  because  (Student  #47)  l a r g e number  extensive  range.  of  74  Page Similar  to the  implied  an  jobs  expansion  in a specific  occupations tended  to  variety  having  with  The  3.  thought  expected,  incidents.  o f or  i g n o r e d , and  t w i s t . Many e x p r e s s e d to write, to a c t u a l l y had  considered.  For  interchange  o£  a  feeling  Showing a l l t h e  example,  their  is helpful  into. because  paper  i t was  also  The  way  revolving  stressed that  facilitative jobs with  ones.  gives  to  wishes.  finder  t h e c o d e was  occupations  of  put down on  in a specific  m i g h t go  r e a c t i o n s but  i n c i d e n t s mostly  t h e more i n t e r e s t i n g  Expands j o b o p t i o n s  arranged  range  the v a l u e  i t opened up a g r e a t e r number o f  what you  These  T h i s a c t i o n seemed  occupation  p r o p o r t i o n of  job expansion. to  the  view, a f o r c e d look a t a  y e t make more c o n c r e t e  fair  them b e i n g  of  most  listing  alternatives.  summary code and  being able because  time  and  produced a around  As  daydream s e c t i o n r e v e a l e d s i m i l a r  that they  liberate  of  jobs not numerous  the  options  opposed t o  field.  the  to a better o v e r a l l  a different  having  occupational  same name, i t  i n c l u d e , an a p p r e c i a t i o n o f a w i d e r  of  The  of the  o f o p t i o n s as  s e c t i o n generated  o p t i o n s due  of  CHOICES c a t e g o r y  75  field  ideas it  i f you're  was  some  Page 76 good in  In one f i e l d ,  you're probably  a l l the jobs l i s t e d  Also  field.  y o u g e t t o s e e what o t h e r  listed  i n that f i e l d .  This category category  i n that  jobs a r e  (Student  i s very similar  #43)  t o t h e CHOICES  o f t h e same name. The i n c i d e n t s  a h e l p f u l n e s s of maximizing options Most were g e n e r a t e d the  occupations  4.  Narrows  The  i t down t o t h e m e d i c a l  The  occupations  section  field, (Student  #61)  narrowed i t  t h a t I c o u l d do. T h i s i s  direction.  Listing  there.  finder  o f gave me t h e b a s i c  because t h i s  right  realize  me r i g h t  occupations  down. I t s o r t  way I ' l l be l e d i n (Student  #49)  t h e daydreams h e l p e d  that there are r e a l l y  me t o  two a r e a s  a r e i n t e r c o n n e c t e d . T h i s h e l p s me t o  eliminate  area.  through the occupations s e c t i o n s ,  b o o k l e t and summary c o d e .  so t h a t h e l p e d  that  in a specific  summary code and o c c u p a t i o n s  helpful  c o n c e n t r a t e on  focus  narrowed  the  good  some and c o n c e n t r a t e  on t h e s e  Page 77 two  areas.  (Student  #47)  In t h e competencies s e c t i o n , s i m i l a r t o the  activities  leaned it  section, I really  t o one s i d e . T h i s  shows a n a p t i t u d e  Basically, incidents)  i s helpful  very similar  p o p u l o u s c a t e g o r y (43  t o t h e same c a t e g o r y i n  CHOICES. N a r r o w i n g t h e r a n g e o f o p t i o n s career d i r e c t i o n  because  i n one d i r e c t i o n . ( S t u d e n t #58)  the thrust of t h i s  i s again  noticed that I  i s considered  and g e t t i n g a  f a c i l i t a t i v e . The  numerous e x a m p l e s above s e r v e  to i l l u s t r a t e the  diversity  f u n n e l l i n g feature of the  of sources  forthis  SDS.  5.  Guides  information  search  H a v i n g t h e number o f t h e CCDO i s h e l p f u l b e c a u s e y o u c a n g e t more in  t h e b o o k s . The more i n f o r m a t i o n , t h e  better  The the  information  the d e c i s i o n . (Student  few i n c i d e n t s i n c l u d e d  guidance provided  i n this category  f o r further information  t h r o u g h t h e CCDO. E v e n t h o u g h t h e r e incidents,  i t was f e l t  #47)  that they  stress  search  were o n l y 2  were d i f f e r e n t  enough  Page 78 yet  logically  p l a u s i b l e t o demand  a c a t e g o r y of  their  own.  6.  Confirms or c l a r i f i e s  In t h e a c t i v i t i e s liked  likes  section,  and d i s l i k e d .  This  it  made me aware o f what  It  gives  you a b a s i c  (where y o u f a r e d  and  I listed  I liked  interests. This  activities  disliked.  (Student  #42)  or l e s s d u p l i c a t e d t h e  a clarification,  self-awareness, a discovery person's  and  o f where y o u s t a r r e d  Most o f t h e i n c i d e n t s more example a b o v e and i n v o l v e d  what I  was h e l p f u l b e c a u s e  idea  well).  dislikes  or a c o n f i r m a t i o n  was a c h i e v e d  s e c t i o n and t h e r e  a  was  of the  mostly through the  no j o b l i n k i n  evidence.  7.  Confirms or d i s c o v e r s  In t h e s e l f - e s t i m a t e helpful think  section  because you don't  of your a b i l i t i e s  helpful kind  capabilities  or  i t was  really  and t h i s i s  because you can f i n d  o f p e r s o n y o u a r e , what  o u t what you're  incapabilities  Page good a t , s t u f f The see  that.  competencies  what s o r t  Things  like  you  (Student  c a n do  and  i s at stake  capabilities  or  section  perceived benefits because  required realistic  i t rendered  i n each  section,  about  themselves,  were s t r o n g i n a c e r t a i n they s t r e s s e d  that  confirm their  abilities.  Although  (Student  a  through  job  the  explicit  the  link.  self-estimate abilities  them t o be  a r e a , b u t most i m p o r t a n t l y ,  i n number, s t u d e n t s a l s o  i n t h e c o m p e t e n c y s e c t i o n and  questions that  t h e y had  8.  Stimulates  and  i f they  i t gave them a c h a n c e t o a s s e s s  fewer  "Can  honest  gave them c o n f i d e n c e  incapabilities  F o r example  #57)  student's  w i t h no  forced  are.  is either  or a d i s c o v e r y of the incapabilities  you  Reinforce  myself.  confirmation  Students  you  c a n ' t do.  what I a l r e a d y knew a b o u t  T h r o u g h o u t , what  #41)  s e c t i o n makes  of rounded person  never  asked  or  or  considered answered  themselves  I make p o t t e r y - y e s  before.  no."  deliberation  Putting  your  helpful  because  79  daydreams down i n w r i t i n g i t makes you  t h i n k more  was seriously  Page about  them and d o e s n ' t  Sometimes y o u t h i n k putting you  really  Generally,  category focused  ignore  and e a c h  d e l i b e r a t i o n o f some s o r t .  is specifically  a collection  on t h i s  there  i t . (Student  t h e whole t e s t  more f u l l y  them.  i t ' s too r i d i c u l o u s but  i t in writing, i t ' s right  can't  stimulated  l e t you I g n o r e  thinking  Most o f t h e i n c i d e n t s stemmed  and  #47)  category  However,  this  of i n c i d e n t s  process. from the daydream  s e c t i o n and were s i m i l a r  t o t h e example a b o v e . Some  added  caused  that the s i t u a t i o n  not  normally  sit  down and t h i n k a b o u t t h e i r  that  i t was  of t h e i r  considered  important,  about  that  them t o " c o n s i d e r  jobs", career  i t helped  that being was test  process,  the  Understanding  n o t n e c e s s a r i l y what  The SDS  a l s o helped  perspective helpful involved  oneself  on how  over  me I'm  historical  changing. This i s  b e c a u s e t h e more I s e e what's i n my  choices,  the b e t t e r  reality  parents  time  get a  made t o  an  wanted.  9.  things  facilitative,  i d e a s and t h a t t h i s d e l i b e r a t i o n was  individualized  80  choice  Page 81 I'll  All  make. ( S t u d e n t  of these  daydream s e c t i o n  incidents  Find  In  or s i m i l a r i t i e s  and t o s e e t h e  between o c c u p a t i o n s  the a c t i v i t i e s  section,  like  that,  y o u do w e l l  in. It's  The  helpful  i n categories  y o u c a n s e e what s p e c i f i c  can see i t r i g h t there  what s k i l l s  i n front  y o u need t o d e v e l o p .  self-estimates  in a b i l i t y .  This  of you,  lacking like  f o r e s t r y , y o u need t o know s t u f f  like  I m i g h t be s t u c k  b u s h and need t o f i x t h e t r u c k . Competencies: t h i s gives  #40)  showed me where I  i s h e l p f u l because  mechanical a b i l i t y .  it  sections,  (Student  need t o improve m y s e l f , where I'm  the  picked.  you can see  b e c a u s e y o u know when t h e y ' r e  in  i t was  o u t where t o improve  what s e c t i o n  you  a  how i n t e r e s t i n g and h e l p f u l  compare o l d and new a s p i r a t i o n s  differences  by t h e  w i t h an e m p h a s i s on t h e h i s t o r i c a l  d i m e n s i o n . Most n o t e d  10.  were g e n e r a t e d  and, i n each c a s e , u n d e r l i n e d  self-understanding  to  #37)  i s helpful  out i n (Student  because  you enthusiasm t o l e a r n the t h i n g s  #54)  Page 82 you  d o n ' t know how t o d o . ( S t u d e n t  The  self-estimate, activities  sections  e q u a l l y produced  Understanding Yourself few. and  #59)  and c o m p e t e n c i e s  the i n c i d e n t s , with the  and Your C a r e e r  contributing a  The above e x a m p l e s a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e contain basically  the discovery  of the others  o f what s k i l l s t o  improve.  11.  Matches c a p a b i l i t i e s  Self-Estimates: your a b i l i t i e s categories.  t o jobs  you can s e p a r a t e a l l i n t o these  different  You m i g h t n o t have  of them b e f o r e .  I t helps  you f i n d  ones a r e open t o y o u , m i g h t field. still  (Student  Competencies: s e e i n g I've  done. T h i s  easier  which a new  field is  #45) what  things  was h e l p f u l b e c a u s e i t ' s  t o p l a n your c a r e e r  which p a r t If  find  L i k e m u s i c , maybe t h i s open t o me.  thought  of the career  i f you see  y o u ' r e good a t .  I'm good a t i t , I ' l l do i t . ( S t u d e n t  This  category  self-awareness  was p r i m a r i l y f o c u s e d  of c a p a b i l i t i e s  #55)  on a  which c o u l d  be t r a n s l a t e d  Page i n t o some t y p e o f from the are  job.  self-estimate  typified  incidents  by  capability  competencies s e c t i o n s .  Most s t r e s s e d  that  paramount  you  i t , you  12.  Matches  do  as  activities asking  can  you  i t . This  the  you  can  interested  always  w h e t h e r you  up  a l l the  ones you  do  like  interested  like i t . "  like  or  incidents  "R "s  and  l  show up.  are  It  summary c o d e s e c t i o n s .  This  offered  #52)  stemmed  generated  i n t e r e s t s to  at  i n , then i t  s e c t i o n with a portion  a matching of  example, some s a i d  i s h e l p f u l because  i n t e r e s t s . (Student  the  certain  lists different  shows what t y p e s o f c a r e e r s  Most o f  and  in a  learn to  add  shows what I*m  the  jobs  section  dislike  " A " ' s . The  Being  in choosing  important. For  i n t e r e s t s to  these  scattered  occupation sections.  "If  in  few  These  the  not  end  originated  summary c o d e ,  a c e r t a i n job.  things  incidents  from the  f a c t o r was  can  the  examples above. A  o c c u p a t i o n was  The  and  were e x p r e s s e d  d a y d r e a m and  acquiring  the  Most o f  83  by  from the the  c a t e g o r y was j o b s as  activities  occupation concerned  opposed t o  and with  matching  Page 84 abilities account.  to jobs. C a p a b i l i t i e s The example above  incidents like  the a t t i t u d e  interest  of person  person  be  The  primary  incidents  their  coaching.  (Student  emphasis o f t h i s  I hadn't i t would  #57)  category  with  from a range o f s e c t i o n s  of both  summary  interests  familiar.  but a l s o their  they maintain  note  a realistic  competence a r e a s . Some  " I f I'm good a t i t a n d I l i k e  go f o r t h a t j o b . "  code)  i n t e r e s t s and c a p a b i l i t i e s i n  f o r an o c c u p a t i o n . N o t o n l y do t h e y  by d e t e r m i n i n g  I'11  what  j o b . I t made  self-estimate, activities,  the combining search  f o r me.  originating  (competencies,  I ' l l  t o jobs  of that - I didn't think  suitable  i t ,  paramount.  i n t o account  forthis  me t h i n k o f t h i n g s l i k e  the  don't  y o u a r e a n d what s o r t o f  i s suitable  thought  being  and c a p a b i l i t i e s  summary code t a k e s  sort  the  Some  seemed t o be " I f I l i k e  job satisfaction  Matches  The  is  into  a n d t h e r e f o r e , knowledge o f j o b s t o a v o i d .  i t " with  13.  i s prototypical.  s t r e s s e d a n a p p r e c i a t i o n o f what t h e y  Generally, do  were n o t t a k e n  check  expressed doing i t ,  Page 85 14.  Confirms or j u s t i f i e s  Occupational really  helped  choice  Booklet  and summary c o d e :  because  i t really  what I t h o u g h t a b o u t m y s e l f . assurance  o f my c a r e e r  The and  booklet  Your C a r e e r  into  is justifiable.  booklet.  planning  These  c h o i c e as e x e m p l i f i e d  Similar  t h a t what  you're  #40)  was d o m i n a t e d by i n c i d e n t s f r o m t h e  by j u s t i f y i n g  SDS H i n d e r i n g  Yourself  because of the  (Student  summary code and t h e U n d e r s t a n d i n g Career  #68)  - i t makes a l o t  i t makes y o u f e e l  This category  (Student  on U n d e r s t a n d i n g  hexagon - t h e c o n g r u e n c e of sense,  confirmed  I t gave me a n  plans.  was h e l p f u l  Codes  Y o u r s e l f a n d Your  incidents facilitated or confirming  career  the student's  i n the prototypes  prior  above.  Categories  t o CHOICES h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s t h e SDS  h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s a r e a l s o a b i t o f a misnomer. T h e y tend The  to f a c i l i t a t e  less,  r a t h e r than  actually  hinder.  7 c a t e g o r i e s a r e o u t l i n e d i n t a b l e 4 and a r e  Page 86 illustrated  i n t h e same manner a s CHOICES. A p p e n d i x H  and  a more d e t a i l e d  I offer  participation  of i n d i v i d u a l  tabulation students.  of the  Page  Table  4  SDS H i n d e r i n g  Categories Incidents  •Students**  (%)  1. L a c k o r m i s l e a d i n g occupational 2.  information  9  8 (23%)  Misidentification/ misdirection  3. I r r e l e v a n c e  of i n t e r e s t s  13  10 ( 2 9 % )  o f some i t e m s  9  6 (17%)  24  13 ( 3 7 % )  21  12 ( 3 4 % )  4. U n r e l i a b i l i t y o f self-estimates 5. F a i l s  to provide  specific  direction  6. Need e x p a n s i o n o f o p t i o n s i n finder 7. No new i n f o r m a t i o n  TOTAL  *  Number o f s t u d e n t s  Percentage  i s based  3(8%)  4  96  who e x p r e s s e d  category. **  15 ( 4 3 % )  20  o v e r 35.  this  type of  Page 1.  Lack  of  (or m i s l e a d i n g )  In t h e  occupational  have g i v e n need  In t h e misleading  high  be  job, e t c .  the  number o f y e a r s  graduation,  (Student  This category with  the  general,  attacked  the  that  was  a clearer  the  everyone  from the  lack of  confusing level  from  occupational  and  after  #40)  the  information concerning  the  the  simply, i t was and  student's Most o f  available,  titles  much t o o  not  j u s t about  resulted  implied a  number o f o p t i o n s  preferred  #59)  numbers. I t  graduates.  educational  (Student  because of the  Because  occupational  could  booklet, i t ' s  beginning.  incidents  they  occupational  school  interaction  booklet,  information  more i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t money,  f o r the  should  occupational  88  booklet.  vocabulary t h a t the  of  the  information  was  very s u p e r f i c i a l .  misleading  portrayed.  numerical  level  way  Several  the  T h e y would  have  s y s t e m as d e m o n s t r a t e d  the  example  above.  2.  Misidentification/misdirection  of  interests  by  Page 89 The  summary code  I had a l e t t e r jobs  I really  i s not h e l p f u l  missing like  because  f o r most o f t h e  t o do. I t d i d not  seem t o be a s good a n i n d i c a t o r  o f what  j o b s a r e good  #45)  f o r you. (Student  Most o f t h e i n c i d e n t s were e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m t h e student's  summary code  category r e f l e c t s  i n t e r v e n t i o n s . B a s i c a l l y , the  t h a t t h e i n t e r e s t s do n o t a g r e e  t h e c o d e r e c e i v e d and t h a t t h i s  seemed t o c a u s e  with  some  c o n s t e r n a t i o n . A few o t h e r  i n c i d e n t s were o c c a s i o n e d  the a c t i v i t i e s ,  or competencies  occupation  These were a l s o m a i n l y a misidentification lack  of depth  section.  with a m i s d i r e c t i o n or  of i n t e r e s t s  but brought  criticized  s e c t i o n and t h o u g h t  the lack of s p o r t s i n the t h a t those  types  would n o t show up, e v e n t h o u g h t h e y were o f  3.  on by a  or scope t o the c h o i c e s a v a i l a b l e . For  e x a m p l e , one p e r s o n activities  concerned  by  I r r e l e v a n c e o f some  instruments,  interest.  items  In t h e c o m p e t e n c i e s s e c t i o n , poetry, acting  musical i n a play  a r e a l l u s e l e s s t o me. T h e y a r e n ' t things that I ' l l  be d o i n g .  (Student  of jobs  #69)  Page 90  this and  Perceived  useless  category.  Incidents  forms t h e b a s i s o f  were drawn f r o m t h e a c t i v i t i e s  competencies s e c t i o n s . They a l l s t r e s s e d t h e  irrelevance vocabulary  skills,  o f some i t e m s m o s t l y due t o t h e d i f f i c u l t (and t h e r e f o r e  questions),  the incomprehensible  the u n i n t e r e s t i n g t o p i c s , the unnecessary  and t h e a t t i t u d e " i f I'm n o t good a t i t , I'm n o t  interested  4.  information  i n i t therefore  Unreliability  i t ' s useless."  of s e l f - e s t i m a t e s  In t h e s e l f - e s t i m a t e s , maybe i f t h e y a t t a c h a n example, scientific  making a new c h e m i c a l  real  t o base  category,  self-estimate  o r what? No  i t on. (Student  while  section, also  a person didn't  restricted  includes  from a l a c k  heavily  underlying  i nthe  i n c i d e n t s from the i n the competencies  have t h e e x p e r i e n c e ,  i n estimating  unreliability  #60)  concentrated  s e c t i o n s a s w e l l . F o r example,  section,  The  a b i l i t y , some p e o p l e m i g h t n o t is i t  This  felt  t h e #7 h e r e i n  know what t h e y mean b y e x c e l l e n t ,  criteria  other  like  could  her l e v e l  so she  of competence.  most o f t h e i n c i d e n t s stems  of c r i t e r i a , an e l e v a t e d  vocabulary  level,  a  Page 91 restriction  t o " y e s o r no" t y p e  understanding especially,  5.  Fails  The  o f how t o i n t e r p r e t  the d i f f i c u l t y  to provide  just  The  were t o o g e n e r a l .  l e a v e s me  thrust  direction.  (Student  #48)  majority of incidents i n t h i s  and r e s e m b l e d of the category  I n c i d e n t s mentioned had  because  i n t h e open, I don't  formed by i n c i d e n t s d e r i v e d booklet  no r e a l  order,  oneself.  direction  o f was n o t h e l p f u l  have a r e a l  t h e q u e s t i o n s , and  in evaluating  specific  occupations  This kind it  answers, a l a c k of  category  was  from the o c c u p a t i o n a l  the prototype  a b o v e . The g e n e r a l  was a l a c k o f s p e c i f i c  that the booklet  was t o o g e n e r a l ,  had t o o much v a r i e t y ,  fostered  sexual  stereotypes  and d i d n o t r e a l l y  differences  i n t o a c c o u n t . One p e r s o n , who had f i v e o u t  o f s i x summary  letters  5/6 o f t h e b o o k l e t . read  take  direction.  individual  i n h i s c o d e , was d i r e c t e d t o w a r d s  He wondered why he had n o t s i m p l y  t h e whole b o o k l e t  instead of doing  the t e s t .  Page 6.  Need e x p a n s i o n  of o p t i o n s  T h e r e were n o t Occupations helpful  enough c h o i c e s  finder.  with the  P l u s you  proper  code  T h i s was  were n e v e r  sure  f o r the exact  (Student  In  c o n t r a s t t o the  direct  incidents dwell mostly finder.  job per  the  finder  officer"  i s omitted.  on a need  while  included  i n the  Several  finder  so  be  felt  i n the  needs r a n g e d  from  at  a  least  t h a t some j o b s i n  is listed  were  while  incidents concerning  coded  these  f o r more o p t i o n s  t h e common t y p e s  "tree surgeon"  c o u l d not  -  code t o s i m p l y h a v i n g  d a y d r e a m s e c t i o n were e x p r e s s e d . occupations  the  previous category,  These e x p r e s s e d  were e x o t i c  example,  of  to  occupation  code. A l s o , s t u d e n t s  out. For  remotely  #45)  f o r more j o b s p e r  one  not  c h o i c e s were  limiting.  desire  i n the  t h i n g s I wanted  because a g a i n , the  occupational  finder  b e c a u s e t h e y were o n l y  concerned do.  in  92  left  "police the  Many d a y d r e a m  b e c a u s e t h e y were  not  Page 93 7.  No new i n f o r m a t i o n  The  competencies s e c t i o n ,  useless  I found  b e c a u s e y o u a l r e a d y know  what y o u c a n d o . ( S t u d e n t  In  t h e few i n c i d e n t s  ingredient helped  #38)  in this  i s that the person  category,  the key  was n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y  by t h e SDS b e c a u s e no new i n f o r m a t i o n was  available  because the person  a l r e a d y knew what  he/she  wanted t o d o . The  results  presented  in this  more c o m p r e h e n s i v e and d e t a i l e d process  events  that f a c i l i t a t e  planning. Previous  descriptive or hinder  ill-suited  resolution  include  f o r the r e f i n e d  seven  of t h i s d i f f i c u l t y ,  13 f a c i l i t a t i v e  categories  map o f  career  b u t v e r y g e n e r a l and  must be made i n c o u n s e l l i n g p r a c t i c e . the  provide a  outcome r e s e a r c h h a s p r o v i d e d  information that i s promising, incomplete,  chapter  judgments t h a t In c o n t r i b u t i n g t o  the category  c a t e g o r i e s and n i n e h i n d e r i n g  f o r CHOICES, 14 f a c i l i t a t i v e  c a t e g o r i e s and  h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s f o r t h e SDS. These  systems a r e intended  systems  to provide  c o m p r e h e n s i v e , and d e t a i l e d  relatively  category  clear,  d e s c r i p t i o n s o f how e a c h  i n t e r v e n t i o n s c o n t r i b u t e s t o c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . In  Page 94 particular,  CHOICES and t h e SDS have been u s e d  interchangeably planning  as i f each c o n t r i b u t e d  comparison  of these  them f o r c o u n s e l l i n g  will  using be  career  i n t h e same way. I n t h e f o l l o w i n g  c a t e g o r y systems w i l l  for  to  these  be u s e d t o make a more r e f i n e d  interventions  and t o d i s t i n g u i s h  p r a c t i c e . In a d d i t i o n ,  interventions  described.  chapter, the  and s u p p o r t i v e  safeguards activities  Page  95  CHAPTER 6 Comparison  Upon t h e of  these  of  the  results,  interventions  can  be  ways. F i r s t ,  the  facilitative  different these  basis  interventions  comparing career  the  Given the  would have a more i n f o r m e d these and  interventions  in helping  categories benefit  call  provide a basis  effectiveness is  based  else  each  could  be  bases  clients.  each  intervention  for particular  done t o  CHOICES and  that  In c o m p a r i n g CHOICES and  the  t o compare and  incidents  as  they are  contrast listed  programs  the  limits  The  that  third  section  of  what  planning.  the  procedure  categories  in tables  to  improve  question  SDS,  hindering  minimize  might  career  SDS  between  clients  or  has  clients.  facilitate  to  Second, the  to avoid  interventions  for  sequencing  for preparing  for  counsellor  for choosing and  use  three  categories  comparison, a  the  be  in  intervention  upon s t u d e n t a n s w e r s t o t h e  Comparison of  will  of  f r o m e a c h p r o g r a m and  for supportive  clarified  in designing  particular  hindrances. Third,  problematic  p r o v i d e a more r e f i n e d b a s i s  contribution  planning.  the  1 and  3.  and The  their  Page p e r c e n t a g e and t h e number  of students  of each type  i n these  The  i s presented  first  superordinate  who gave  t h i n g t h a t one i s s t r u c k categories Occupational  with  i s that the  Awareness, f o r both  i n t e r v e n t i o n s . Upon c l o s e r i n s p e c t i o n ,  however,  c a t e g o r i e s and v a r y i n g  participation Awareness  are revealed  received a very  percentages of  f o r each. high  Occupational  participation  rate  e a c h p r o g r a m , b u t CHOICES had e i g h t c a t e g o r i e s SDS had f i v e .  SDS S e l f - A w a r e n e s s c o m p i l e d  participation  t o CHOICES' 40%. A l s o  categories category,  participation These  CHOICES  be examined  section  (Considers options; Narrows  Expands focus)  one t h r o u g h  first four  Expands g e n e r a l j o b  in a specific  and a r e s i m i l a r  field;  f o r b o t h CHOICES and SDS.  A c l o s e r examination of the a c t u a l reveals differences.  the c a t e g o r i e s  s e c t i o n s . The  requirements;  job options  superordinate  to three.  i n more d e t a i l  of c a t e g o r i e s  educational  five  g i v e a s e n s e o f what t h e  in six different  i s comprised  while the  ( 9 1 % t o 46%) i n  observations  two programs s t r e s s . Now, will  SDS had  and had f o u r c a t e g o r i e s  initial  from  86%  t o two f o r CHOICES. I n t h e l a s t SDS d o u b l e d  Incidents  tables.  S e l f - A w a r e n e s s and Match a r e i d e n t i c a l  different  96  i n c i d e n t s , however,  Page 97 In t h e f i r s t requirements) CHOICES stated  category  (Considers  the percentages  are q u i t e s i m i l a r but  i s much more s p e c i f i c . t h a t she was a b l e  educational  l e v e l s and s e e what I c o u l d e a r n The s t u d e n t  education  from grade  ranging  t o a graduate  only  6 levels  less  specificity.  of education  The  the types  t o look  through  example, one s t u d e n t helpful kind  producing  jobs they  other  the  community SDS  incidents with  effects  stated that "this through  of being  t h e whole t h i n g , i t  exposure  i g n o r e d , seemed  c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . CHOICES, on t h e this  o f n o t more t h a n an o v e r v i e w  the Occupational  you  of the sheer  and t h e s u b s e q u e n t  hand, d i d n o t g e n e r a t e  not permit  much  was k i n d o f  of b e f o r e . " T h i s r e a l i z a t i o n  to their  offers  Occupational Finder, For  would have o t h e r w i s e  produced a l i s t  in  l e v e l s of  o f f o r c e d y o u t o l o o k a t some o c c u p a t i o n s  beneficial  did  depending  (Expands g e n e r a l j o b  number o f c a r e e r s a v a i l a b l e to  In comparison,  the p o s i t i v e  b e c a u s e by g o i n g  hadn't thought  person  of i n c i d e n t s again v a r i e d i n focus.  SDS g r o u p e x p r e s s e d  forced  has 16 v a r i o u s 8, t o one y e a r  degree.  In t h e second c a t e g o r y options),  F o r example, one  " t o look a t the v a r i o u s  on my e d u c a t i o n . "  college  educational  Finder.  type  of i n c i d e n t . I t  25 j o b s a t t h e end b u t  of a l l jobs such  as  presented  Page Several students of  r e a d i n g the  detailed  generated  job l i s t  i n CHOICES m a i n l y  e x p l a n a t i o n t h a t can  simply presents a l i s t . the  vocabulary  jobs  looked  meant. The  level.  A few  One  interesting SDS  participation  i n c i d e n t s about the  he  because of  the  The  students  trouble with  had  f o r example,  SDS  that  d i d n ' t know what  d i d , however, g e n e r a t e in this  ease  be a c c e s s e d .  noted  but  98  83%  the  they  student  c a t e g o r y a s compared t o  54%  for  CHOICES. CHOICES d i d have c l o s e t o t w i c e in  the  third  field), in  the  as  (Expands  compared t o t h e  incidents  students variety  category  SDS  themselves  expressed  the  of c l u s t e r e d  the  participation  job options ( 4 9 % vs  in a  23%). D i f f e r e n c e s  r e v e a l e d t h a t the  h e l p f u l n e s s of having  jobs  laid  out  in front  SDS a wide  of  T h i s seemed t o promote a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g occupational  fields.  The  student  thought  occupations one  as  was  being  helpful  i s b e t t e r , w h i c h one  specificity  For  of two  because then  "you  can  t o you."  The  appeals the  job  example,  comparison  o f CHOICES and  seem t o s u r f a c e a g a i n .  of  the accompanying  facilitative.  t h a t the  them.  CHOICES g r o u p s t r e s s e d t h e  COMPARE or RELATED r o u t e s and description  specific  or  one  three see  g e n e r a l i t y of the  which  SDS  Page 99 In  the fourth category  (Narrows f o c u s ) ,  seem t o be e x p r e s s i n g t h e need e n e r g i e s towards a f i e l d this.  n a r r o w s by v i r t u e t h e number literally can  now  sections."  that  she l i k e d  " t h e way t h e y g r o u p e d  60% p a r t i c i p a t i o n second  section  i n tables  of t h i s  w i t h CHOICES' s t r e s s  any i n c i d e n t s  category garnered  on t h e e x t r i n s i c  i s unique  comparable  to i t .  the highest p a r t i c i p a t i o n  t h e y had n e v e r  thought  They d e s c r i b e d t h i s  on t h e i r  facilitating  aspirations  their  work  t o CHOICES. The Yet  rate  students  t o c o n s i d e r t h e 12  work f e a t u r e s and now t h e y r e a l i z e  importance. check  comparison  o f a l l t h e CHOICES c a t e g o r i e s . Numerous that  the  1 and 3, SDS  more d e t a i l e d  SDS d i d n o t g e n e r a t e  extrinsic  group  and CHOICES had 43%.  category  stated  cannot  how t h e j o b s a r e  features. This f i f t h  (69%)  They  o n l y know  I c a n n a r r o w i t down t o d i f f e r e n t  As c a n be s e e n  concerned  this  The s t u d e n t s  and how t h e y a r e c h o o s i n g . F o r example, one  sections,  The  f e a t u r e . CHOICES  of e l i m i n a t i n g .  a t every section,  stated  garnered  permit  between t h e two,  o f j o b s t h e y have r e m a i n i n g .  observe,  student  of t h i s  programs  s e e t h e o p e r a t i o n a s i n t h e SDS. The SDS  clustered  is  and how b o t h  t o be t h e s o u r c e  groups  for channelling their  The o n l y a p p r e c i a b l e d i f f e r e n c e  appears  both  f e a t u r e as a  their realistic  and p e r c e i v e d i t a s  c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . T h i s seems t o be one  Page 100 of  t h e major accomplishments  of t h e major d i f f e r e n c e s The  third  o f CHOICES a l o n g w i t h one  w i t h t h e SDS.  s e c t i o n addresses  amount o f i n f o r m a t i o n p r o d u c e d SDS. A l t h o u g h Information expressed for  search)  concerned  with  (Guides  i n f o r m a t i o n , o n l y 6%  t h e h e l p f u l n e s s o f p r o v i d i n g t h e CCDO number  much beyond t h i s generated  to s p e c i f i c  i n the Ocupational limited  occupation Future  stressing  i n f o r m a t i o n on s p e c i f i c  would p r o d u c e  F i n d e r . CHOICES went  f e a t u r e . Half of the students  incidents  s i m p l y had t o punch  helpful  by CHOICES a s compared t o  t h e SDS had one c a t e g o r y  t h e 456 j o b s  (49%)  t h e s p e c i f i c i t y and  t h e ease o f a c c e s s occupations.  They  i n t h e s u p p l i e d CCDO number a n d t h i s  12 v a r i o u s t o p i c s  concerning the  i n question. outlook  was a l s o deemed i m p o r t a n t and  b y 43% o f t h e CHOICES g r o u p a s i n d i c a t e d  "Judges f u t u r e o f j o b s "  by t h e  category.  " P r o v i d e s r e f e r e n c e f o r f u t u r e p l a n n i n g " was another  category  formed o n l y  c a t e g o r y was c o n c e r n e d possessing  the printout  i n t h e CHOICES g r o u p .  with the b e n e f i c i a l and k e e p i n g  This  aspects of  i t for future  r e f e r e n c e . The SDS g r o u p was a l s o a b l e t o s t o r e t h e program f o r f u t u r e r e f e r e n c e but t h i s by a n y o n e . Y e t , 46% p a r t i c i p a t i o n CHOICES g r o u p .  was n o t m e n t i o n e d  was a c h i e v e d  by t h e  Page Therefore, specifically future  i n terms of  in future  reference,  than the  SDS,  outlook,  with only  minor  fourth section  categories.  The  participation  SDS  and  had  88  nature  of  the  related that  interests." of s e l f , on  Also,  with  to  19  2  focused  p r i m a r i l y on  lies  CHOICES. A p t i t u d e s  mentioned, d i d not  and  in  example,  a  your  d i d express a  discovery  t e s t s p r i o r to  temperaments, as  p l a y a major r o l e  the  superficial  aware o f  the  The  self-awareness  i n c i d e n t s . For  " i t made you  categories  incidents.  difference also  s t u d e n t s who  providing  86%  i n c i d e n t s . CHOICES g e n e r a t e d  t y p e s of s e l f - a w a r e n e s s student  in  with  p a r t i c i p a t i o n and  t h a n CHOICES. The  information  self-awareness  i n c i d e n t s compared  more c o n c e r n e d  features  on  5 categories  SDS  seems t o be  more  and  information.  focuses  40%  topics  facilitation  for  i n CHOICES w i t h  information,  specific  CHOICES c l e a r l y g i v e s  some d i r e c t i o n i n s e a r c h i n g The  occupational  101  going  previously  i n the  Travel  Guide  preparations. The  SDS,  in e l i c i t i n g  however, seems t o be s e l f - a w a r e n e s s . The  indicate  a concern over  specific  way.  For  five  understanding  example, a g i r l  activities  s e c t i o n showed her  thought  before  of  much more e f f e c t i v e  oneself  stated  "stuff  t h a t m i g h t be  categories a l l  that  that I've  in a the never  interesting, like  Page building  things with  Three CHOICES over  wood."  o f the c a t e g o r i e s a r e not mentioned  (Stimulates deliberation,  t i m e , and F i n d important  particular  interest  oneself  These  would  t o someone p l a n n i n g a c a r e e r . Of i s the "Understanding  t i m e " c a t e g o r y w h i c h was g e n e r a t e d daydream s e c t i o n .  by  Understanding  o u t where t o i m p r o v e ) .  seem q u i t e  102  o n e s e l f over  m o s t l y by t h e  CHOICES d o e s n o t have t h i s  feature  which a l s o s e r v e s as a c o n f i r m i n g i n s t r u m e n t . That i s , if  t h e Daydream c o d e s  and t h e a c t u a l  correspond, the inventory v a l i d a t e s interval Also  check  the "Find  i s a primitive  indirectly mentioned  through  of s k i l l s  that  t h e GATB t e s t  i n the incidents.  more s e l f - a w a r e n e s s b o t h  itself.  reality  o u t where t o i m p r o v e "  be a needed c h e c k l i s t  worked-through  code  This  testing  feature.  c a t e g o r y seems t o CHOICES  addresses  b u t w h i c h was n o t  T h e r e f o r e t h e SDS  evokes  i n q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y o f  incidents. In  the f i f t h  matching  section,  t h e SDS seems t o e m p h a s i z e  and t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g  o f i t much more s o t h a n  CHOICES. F o r example, t h e SDS p r o d u c e d categories interests  (Matches  t o j o b s , and M a t c h e s  capabilities to  capabilities  57 i n c i d e n t s  t o j o b s , Matches  i n t e r e s t s and  t o j o b s ) f o r 74% p a r t i c i p a t i o n  CHOICES' 7 i n c i d e n t s  in 3  i n one c a t e g o r y  a s compared  (Matches  Page 103 interests Also  and a p t i t u d e s  t o j o b s ) f o r 14% p a r t i c i p a t i o n .  the range of i n c i d e n t s  SDS, l i n k i n g This  jobs  i s much more v a r i e d  to i n t e r e s t s , c a p a b i l i t i e s  s i x t h and f i n a l capabilities  SDS c a t e g o r y  "Confirms or j u s t i f i e s  revolve  same  o f t h e two p r o g r a m s . B o t h t h e  of choices"  e s s e n t i a l l y around  confirmation.  c h o i c e s " and c a t e g o r y seem t o  the p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s of t h i s  While percentages a r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y the  (SDS = 37%, CHOICES = 3 1 % ) , t h e t h r u s t  incidents  or both.  s e c t i o n compares t h e  confirmation  CHOICES' " C o n f i r m a t i o n  i n the  of the  r e v e a l more o f a d i f f e r e n c e . The m a c h i n e - l i k e  a c c u r a c y o f CHOICES seems t o promote a d i f f e r e n t q u a l i t y of c o n f i r m a t i o n .  F o r example, one g i r l  knew i t was c o r r e c t b e c a u s e The  SDS, w i t h  booklet, it.  was a p t t o e x p l a i n  sense,  t h a t she  " i t ' s n o t human, no e r r o r s " .  i t s Understanding Yourself  One s t u d e n t ,  helpful  stressed  and Your  the confirmation  f o r example, noted  that  and  Career justify  the booklet  was  " b e c a u s e o f t h e h e x a g o n , i t makes a l o t o f i t makes y o u f e e l  that  what y o u ' r e  into i s  justifiable." CHOICES a l s o goes one s t e p be  able  to disconfirm  f u r t h e r a s i t seems t o  more c l e a r l y  t h a n t h e SDS.  No i n c i d e n t s o f p o s i t i v e d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n expressed stress  by t h e SDS g r o u p ;  were  17% o f t h e CHOICES g r o u p d i d  the r o l e of d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n  played  by t h e  Page 104 computer. F o r example, a s t u d e n t mentioned w o u l d n ' t do a n y o f t h e j o b s he had c h o s e n CHOICES b e c a u s e , able  with the d e t a i l e d  to get a clearer  picture  To  qualitative  conclude  this  t h a t he prior to  description,  of the a c t u a l  he was  occupations.  comparison,  the  o v e r l a p between CHOICES and t h e SDS seems r a t h e r superficial.  There  is a similarity  m i n o r . T h e s e a r e two d i s t i n c t advantages. stressing work  CHOICES o f f e r s  reality  programs w i t h  i n f o r m a t i o n on 12  constraints,  t o be  different topics  s p e c i f i c i t y and e x t r i n s i c  f e a t u r e s . The SDS e m p h a s i z e s  self-awareness  but i t tends  and u n d e r s t a n d i n g  understanding, of the matching  p r o c e s s . CHOICES seems more a p p r o p r i a t e f o r p l a n n i n g and specific  d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g o p t i o n s w h i l e t h e SDS seems  more v a l u a b l e f o r g e n e r a l e x p l o r a t i o n , decisions  regarding f i e l d s .  w h i l e CHOICES t e n d s  Safeguards;  i s more g e n e r a l ,  t o be more s p e c i f i c  global  (Appendix 0 ) .  CHOICES  Following  this  on ways t o p r e p a r e will  SDS  u n d e r s t a n d i n g and  be o u t l i n e d .  qualitative people  f o r these  This w i l l  t h e s t u d e n t s have s t a t e d  comparison, two  safeguards  interventions  be done by f o l l o w i n g what  hindered  them i n t h e i r  p l a n n i n g . As p r e v i o u s l y m e n t i o n e d , no  incidents  career  Page emphasized career  directly  less  percentages each  the h i n d e r i n g or the p r e v e n t i o n of  p l a n n i n g . I t was more a c a s e  helpful,  facilitative.  Looking hindering  Table  o f s t u d e n t s who  category  a t CHOICES  incident,  of being  2 ( p . 59) p o r t r a y s t h e  first,  "Useless  t h e most  the  o f r e a d i n g and f i l l i n g  Guide e n t i t l e d  features with t h i s take  that The  feature into category  jobs" raises the system accessing  out a c l a u s e i n matter  to  me".  then not  account. b a s i s f o r narrowing of understanding  In the i n s t r u c t i o n s  o f how  prior to  CHOICES, s t u d e n t s c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d how t h e and e l i m i n a t e s a l l b u t 25 j o b s ,  answers a f f e c t  example  underlines  c l a u s e . CHOICES w i l l  "Questionable  functions.  37%  t o ignore any or a l l  problems of a lack  computer d e d u c t s their  simple  the i n s t r u c t o r  "This doesn't  s t u d e n t can then choose  popular  information" with  suggests  The  that  4 ( p . 82) i n t h e SDS.  participation,  the T r a v e l  less  gave h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s f o r  i n CHOICES, T a b l e  importance  105  of t h i s  understanding  how  t h e n a r r o w e d down o p t i o n s . A c l e a r  process  i s a p t t o promote a n  of the process  to f a c i l i t a t e  and e n c o u r a g e  a f l e x i b i l i t y of o p t i o n s . The students  "Lack  of i n f o r m a t i o n " category suggests  of missing  i n f o r m a t i o n s u c h a s : no l i s t  c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s ,  the courses  warning of  necessary to  Page graduate, choice  the a c t u a l  o n l y , n o t Canada w i d e , d e t a i l e d  o n l y the s t a r r e d researched have a  of u n i v e r s i t i e s ,  i n f o r m a t i o n on  (the o t h e r s can  be  the courses  necessary  now  to  etc.  Seventeen disappointment c h o i c e . " To instructor find  Another  occupations  provincial  w i t h t h e g i v e n CCDO number). CHOICES d o e s  list  graduate  and  p l a c e s o f employment, a  106  of the s t u d e n t s expressed  i n the c a t e g o r y  combat t h e s h o c k  "Fails  way  how  he  o r she  would be  what he  prior  of d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n , the  answered  to access  or she  their  to c o n f i r m a  c o u l d w e l l a d v i s e the s t u d e n t  out  discover  percent  to  backtrack  the T r a v e l  the p r e f e r r e d  i s missing for that  Guide.  choice  to  particular  occupation. In the c a t e g o r y options", 17%  the  expressed,  o u t " computer that  the  12  " P u z z l i n g and  instructor  could prevent  by s t r e s s i n g  the  syndrome. A l s o he  t o p i c s do  not  cover  a r e a s . F o r example, q u e a s i n e s s is  not a t o p i c  i n a p p r o p r i a t e job  "garbage o r she  that  i n , garbage  could  indicate  every s i t u a t i o n over  t h e r e f o r e a person  a n o n - v i a b l e o p t i o n such as  problems,  the s i g h t  m i g h t be  and a l l  of  blood  saddled  with  surgeon.  A safeguard to eliminate hindrances  such  as  those  expressed  i n "Needed more o p t i o n s " and  "Rushed  terminal"  i s t o promote an a t t i t u d e  experimentation  of  on  Page with  the  computer. That  o n l y EXPLORE. Time  i s , t r y the  is a factor  t o e n c o u r a g e them t o s c h e d u l e initial  time  The  to generate  category  information", corrected  incident,  salary  an  level  students and  malfunction",  their  not  be  c o n t i n u a l l y updated. produced  this  rushed.  The  particularly  i n regards  o n l y one  i t does not  be It is  type  credibility.  t h e employment  S i n c e t h e r e was  hour a f t e r  necessary  some p r o b l e m s t h a t c o u l d  e v e n t h o u g h o n l y 9%  the  i t would be  not  "Unreliable occupational  highlights  to maintain  routes,  more o p t i o n s and  i f t h e s y s t e m was  important,  forewarn  of  so  other  107  of  instructor to  could the  outlook.  incident  i n "Machine  seem t o be a major  problem.  S a f e g u a r d s ; sps  will  In a s i m i l a r  way  be  f o l l o w i n g the  presented  displayed the  i n Table  percentages  inncidents  t o CHOICES, s a f e g u a r d s  who  also  outlines  gave h i n d e r i n g  i n the v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s .  Looking  a t the c a t e g o r y w i t h  "Need e x p a n s i o n participation,  of o p t i o n s one  t h e most  in finder"  safeguard  SDS  h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s as  4 (p. 87). T h i s t a b l e  of s t u d e n t s  f o r the  c o u l d be  with  incidents 43%  a stress  i n the  Page 108 i n s t r u c t i o n s about the l i m i t e d the  finder  For  example t h e p e r s o n  letter could thus  and a b o u t ways o f e x p a n d i n g t h e s e  code  could  options  gaining a cluster category  by r e f e r r i n g of r e l a t e d  "Unreliability  produced a p a r t i c i p a t i o n t o be l o w e r  t o t h e CCDO number  jobs. of s e l f - e s t i m a t e s "  (1974) r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e f o l l o w e d  "Fails  also  had a h i g h  that  could  Holland's The  to provide  specific  participation  be implemented e a s i l y (1979) comment  SDS  i s only  can only  a person predict This  direction" ( 3 4 % ) . One  intended  search.  p r e f e r s : i t cannot choice  29% p a r t i c i p a t i o n ,  of  At best, occupations  efficiently  f o r a person,  the next  "Misidentification/misdirection seemed q u i t e p o p u l a r .  safeguard  to f a c i l i t a t e  knowledge would h o p e f u l l y l o w e r With  category  would be t o s t r e s s  indicate a class  a single  input.  to the students:  a person's occupational it  rate  i f Holland's  such as showing the  t o f r i e n d s and f a m i l y f o r t h e i r  The  i sapt  f o r the s e l f - e s t i m a t e s are  f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d and e m p h a s i z e d . A l s o ,  booklet  two  o r he o r she  r a t e o f 37%. T h i s t o t a l  i f the c r i t e r i a  in  options.  use an i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e  i n s t e a d of t h e normal t h r e e ,  generate  The  number o f o c c u p a t i o n s  (p.14)  expectations. category  of i n t e r e s t s "  The s a f e g u a r d s ,  also  a s o u t l i n e d by  Page 109 Holland  (1979), appear  emphasized 1.  t o be s t r o n g  and u n d e r s t o o d ,  to counteract  A person's resemblance the  6 types  assessment not 2.  enough  i f properly  this  category:  t o each of  i n the personal i s determined  5  times,  once.  A person searches permutations  for a l l  of the 3  letter  summary c o d e , n o t one p e r m u t a t i o n . 3.  A p e r s o n compares t h e summary code w i t h  the codes of h i s / h e r  occupational 4.  The u s e r  i s referred  counsellor or  daydreams.  f o r more  f o r other  kinds  to a information of help.  S l i g h t l y more t h a n a q u a r t e r were i n v o l v e d occupational to s t r e s s levels.  information".  the numerical  Another s o l u t i o n  confusing The items"  i n the category  "Lack o r  would be t o change  two c a t e g o r i e s ,  as the o t h e r s  However, i t i s i m p o r t a n t  would be  system of the educational this  one. "Irrelevance  o f some  and "No new i n f o r m a t i o n " d i d n o t g a r n e r  participation  (23%)  misleading  The major s a f e g u a r d  system to a simpler next  of the students  ( 1 7 % and 9%  to stress  a s much  respectively).  the range o f  Page activities safeguard  and  competencies  a g a i n s t not  interested  included  trying  the  i n i t . F o s t e r i n g an  promote b e t t e r c a r e e r  i n the  item  SDS  i f they  110  to  are  not  open a t t i t u d e i s a p t  to  planning.  other  Coupled with  the  questions,  the  be  facilitate  done t o  students  however, t h a t t h e s e preceding on  specific  categories  expressed  an  Following  r a n g e and  similar  each student  are  H.  planning.  based  Both the  One  must  (Table  5 ) . The  participated lists  presented  w e l l as  i n are  the  note,  opinions  types  type  r i c h n e s s of the  a brief  category.  the and  the  not SDS  similar  of outlined in of  student  category.  p r o t o t y p i c a l examples of with  could  than  CHOICES and  i n c i d e n t f o r each 5,  on  c a t e g o r i e s as  Appendix J  Table  hindering  c a t e g o r i e s are d i f f e r e n t  patterns  A p p e n d i x F and  category  career  observations.  participation  and  were a l s o a s k e d what e l s e  c a t e g o r i e s . They a r e  groups generated  who  facilitative  explanation  each of  the  Page 111 Table  5  What E l s e  C o u l d be H e l p f u l  i n Career  CATEGORIES  NUMBER OF CHOICES  1. More  Planning  SDS  TOTAL  INCIDENTS *STUDENTS**(%)  realistic  occupational information 2. R e a l i t y 3. S t a r t and  testing  planning  also  9  25  20 (29%)  7  7  14  14 (20%)  6  15  21  17 (24%)  10  3  13  12 ( 1 7 % )  8  5  13  13 (19%)  4  9  9 (13%)  earlier  later  4. J o b h u n t i n g s k i l l s 5. More  16  i n f o r m a t i o n on  educational opportunities 6. N o t h i n g  else.  It's a  personal d i r e c t i o n 7. More t e s t s and  *  t o measure  abilities  8. T e a c h e r  5  interests  2  1  3  3 ( 4 % )  involvement  2  0  2  2 ( 3 % )  TOTAL  56  44  Number o f s t u d e n t s who  expressed  category. ** P e r c e n t a g e  i s based  over  70.  this  type of  Page 112 1.  More r e a l i s t i c  It  occupational  would be h e l p f u l  i n my  field.  "truth".  through and  I t ' snot l i k e  guest  Reality  during career  to having  of i t .  category  ways o f o b t a i n i n g more  days,  to going  to seeing videos  of the j o b , t o  i n t e r v i e w with the  b e t t e r p a m p h l e t s and books on  Testing  job experience  you're  from  and m e e t i n g  occupations.  good b e c a u s e t h e n if  you the pros  information v i a a personal  individual  The  can t e l l  been  i n f o r m a t i o n . These range  a t the job s i t e ,  counsellor,  2.  because they've  t o t h e example a b o v e , t h i s  occupational  obtaining  a book.  #40)  speakers  people  you t h e  reading  incidents suggesting  realistic  t o someone  - s o you know t h e r e a l i t y  (Student  contains  help  i t and t h e y  cons  Similar  to talk  They c a n g i v e  They can r e a l l y  information  p r o g r a m would be you c o u l d  r e a l l y see  f i t f o r the j o b . (Student  #9)  Page The around  suggestions  getting  experience  Start  hands-on e x p e r i e n c e  incidents are s i m i l a r  p l a n n i n g sooner  In grade course  8,  courses  I going  The  list  What  and  programs t h a t  the a b i l i t y  as  important  should a l s o  two  am  (Student  category  incidents  planning. Only  drop-outs.  Because i n  #37)  i s to will  urge encourage  were c o n c e r n e d  o f f p o i n t . Career  c o u r s e s were c i t e d  communities  prototype.  jobs,  i n t h e s c h o o l . Grade  starting  CHOICES, t h e SDS  experience.  available  confused.  of t h i s  institute  planning e a r l i e r  earlier  jobs  a shock!  I was  p l a n n i n g . Most o f t h e  favorite  of  i t ' s like  t o do?  to  a work  later  i n v o l v e d i n these  general g i s t  authorities  t o the  also  necessary etcetera.  Grade 12,  pay  through  have a c a r e e r p l a n n i n g  with a  w i t h what's  and  incidents revolve  either  p r o g r a m o r a work w i t h o u t  Most o f t h e  3.  involved i n these  113  8 seemed t o be  the  planning courses,  to take a v a r i e t y tools  for  of  instituting  i n c i d e n t s mentioned  offer  with  that  p r o g r a m s f o r s e n i o r s and  Page 114 4.  Job hunting  Learning  skills  how t o do a j o b s e a r c h  would be h e l p f u l .  This  category  (Student  #59)  has i n c i d e n t s c o n c e r n e d m a i n l y  ways o f o b t a i n i n g a j o b . S t u d e n t s would to  g e t a j o b , how t o w r i t e  oneself  i n an i n t e r v i e w ,  c o r r e c t l y and would  5.  More  like  information  I do l i k e courses  s i t down w i t h  those  courses  (Student  As  to plan  I'd l i k e  i n doing  these  skills.  opportunities  what  t o be a b l e  someone t o d e t e r m i n e  I need  for special  and example  on a c a d e m i c  incidents underline for  practice  e d . a t UBC.  #20)  the t i t l e  concentrates  how t o w r i t e a p p l i c a t i o n s  I ' l l need s o I c a n d e t e r m i n e  how t o g e t t h e r e . to  t o know how  r e s u m e s , how t o c o n d u c t  on e d u c a t i o n a l  t o be a b l e  like  with  indicate,  information.  t h e need  requirements a t c e r t a i n  knowledge on how t o a c q u i r e  this  Other  for specific smaller  category types of  information,  universities, for  a l o a n and on how t o a p p l y  Page  to 6.  the  universities.  Nothing  School  else,  i t ' s a personal  Most s t u d e n t s satisfaction  up t o y o u . ( S t u d e n t  in this  group expressed  a  with the career planning e f f e c t s  s c h o o l and s i m p l y b e l i e v e d t h a t  More t e s t s  Should  decision  i s doing e v e r y t h i n g p o s s i b l e to  help us. I t ' s r e a l l y  7.  115  t o measure  interests  have d i f f e r e n t  measure  your  few we  Included  in this  abilities.  8.  Teacher  Teachers  and  "up t o  have now.  (Student  #66)  category are incidents  take  them."  abilities  of t h e i r  involvement  should  of the  i n s t e a d of  a need f o r more o b j e c t i v e m e a s u r e s and  now  certain  tests to  abilities  the v e r y  i t was  #68)  more  Some o n l y g e t you t h r o u g h  interest. the course.  expressing interests  Page They don't g i v e (Student  This  However, i t was  overall  i s comprised  felt  consideration  as  importance  the  teacher's  an  view.  #32)  category  of  you  116  a  that  full idea.  influence  of  it still  fledged  only did  2  incidents.  merit  c a t e g o r y because of  I t d o e s seem p l a u s i b l e t h a t  would  instigate  better  the a  career  planning. To are  conclude t h i s  important  planning actions  in  to people wishing  program i n a s c h o o l . possible  With t h i s how  s e c t i o n , these various  a better  b e n e f i t s and  or  implement a  Knowing o t h e r  hinder  how  the  career  helpful.  i n s t r u m e n t s work, t h a t planning,  counsellors  p o s i t i o n to enable students to minimize p o t e n t i a l  career  facilitative  t o s t u d e n t s seems i n h e r e n t l y  knowledge o f  they help  to  categories  detriments.  maximize  is are  Page  117  CHAPTER 7  Reliability  The chapter  were g e n e r a t e d  systems,  but r a t h e r  planning.  from the v a r i o u s  validation  of these  program does t o f a c i l i t a t e of prominent  i n terms of r e l i a b i l i t y  resolved,  incidents  in this  career k i n d s o f doubt  and v a l i d i t y w i l l  c h a p t e r . I f t h e s e c a n be  then a reasonable warrant  the r e l i a b i l i t y  category  t o d e v e l o p a s e t of c a t e g o r i e s which  However, a r a n g e  considered  for  a clearcut  what e a c h  both  i n the p r e c e d i n g  by t h e s u b j e c t s . T h i s s t u d y was n o t d e s i g n e d  establish  map  Validity  c a t e g o r y systems examined  expressed to  and  and v a l i d i t y  might  be  successfully  be  established  of the c a t e g o r y  systems.  Reliability  of C a t e g o r i z a t i o n  One s o u r c e  of evidence  for increasing  these c a t e g o r i e s i s the r e l i a b i l i t y used. used  Reliable  with which they a r e  categories are categories that  i n a t r u s t w o r t h y manner  form of r e l i a b i l i t y instance,  confidence i n  by i n d e p e n d e n t  is different  c a n be  judges. This  than o t h e r s . For  i s t h e method o f c o l l e c t i n g  the data  reliable?  Page A n d e r s s o n and number o f the  Nilsson  (1964) d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t  i n c i d e n t s and  various  categories  of c o l l e c t i o n  or  also  evidence  provides  collected  are  from the  group  independent  that  Others are  (1954)  questionnaires way  and  of c o l l e c t i n g  purport  be  including individual  i s a l s o of c o n c e r n .  c a t e g o r i z a t i o n does not possible.  formats  in  method  s i m i l a r i n c i d e n t s can  a reliable  construction  from the  interviewers. Flanagan  interviews,  forms. Along with  the  subsequent d i s t r i b u t i o n  from a v a r i e t y of  interviews,  category  the  both  118  t o be  record  the  data,  This  the  only  p o s s i b l e d e p e n d i n g on  system  the  purpose  of c a t e g o r i z a t i o n . However, c a t e g o r i e s This  can  be  determined  judges can  use  the  incidents.  Three  must r e f l e c t  l a r g e l y by  categories  whether  to r e l i a b l y  female graduate s t u d e n t s  j u d g e s . The  i n c i d e n t s were r e w r i t t e n  identifying  d a t a ) on  stratified insure one  cards  t h a t each category  administered instructions. title  3x5  random sample o f  incident to  of  the  the  five.  was  I t was category  j u d g e t o match t h e  the  found on  3x5  run  clarity  and  not  the  as  A  drawn  to  at a r a t i o  through  of  simply  cards  i n c i d e n t s was  acted  judges' use.  represented  that  categorize  i n c i d e n t s was  A preliminary  to determine  independent  ( s t r i p p e d of a l l  f o r the  150  incidents.  of  was  the  providing  the  then asking  the  c l e a r enough. Word  Page ambiguities produced 72%  coupled  with  reliability  the sheer  number  supplemented with  of c a t e g o r i e s  r a t i n g s o f 90% f o r CHOICES and  f o r SDS. S u b s e q u e n t l y , t h e c a t e g o r y a brief  titles  further explained  "it  by n a r r o w i n g and i t h e l p s  down t o one o r two The  three  were  by s t a t i n g  that  t o reduce  areas."  j u d g e s were  of a p p r o x i m a t e l y  only  e x p l a n a t i o n . F o r example,  "Narrows f o c u s " was gives d i r e c t i o n  119  interviewed  an hour and a h a l f  twice  for a  e a c h . The  total  interviews  were c o n d u c t e d a t t h e u n i v e r s i t y and t h e s t u d e n t s ' homes. After categories,  a brief  w r i t t e n on 3x5 c a r d s ,  j u d g e s were g i v e n  Place that  these  the f o l l o w i n g  i n c i d e n t s under  you f e e l  Please  d e s c r i p t i o n of the study,  doesn't  displayed,  The  instructions:  categories  please  you w i s h . I f t h e  f i t any of the c a t e g o r i e s discard i t .  T h i s p r o c e d u r e was r e p e a t e d different  d a y s . On t h e f i r s t  incidents  f o r both  the  were d e s c r i b e d .  encompass t h e i n c i d e n t s .  ask any q u e s t i o n s  incident  the  four times  day, o n l y the  over  two  facilitative  CHOICES and SDS were c a t e g o r i z e d .  second day, the h i n d e r i n g  On  i n c i d e n t s were c a t e g o r i z e d  Page 120 in  t h e same The  depicted  way.  high  reliability  i n Table  of over  80% a g r e e m e n t , a s  6, seems t o w a r r a n t  c a t e g o r y systems a r e t r u s t w o r t h y .  the c l a i m  That  judges can d i f f e r e n t i a t e  and i n t e g r a t e  a b o u t t h e same way u s i n g  these  sets  t h a t the  i s , independent incidents in  of c a t e g o r i e s .  Table 6  Percentage Category  o f Agreement  between  J u d g e s and E s t a b l i s h e d  Systems CHOICES  Facilitative  SDS  Hindering  Facilitative  Hindering  Judge  #1  100%  100%  96%  94%  Judge  #2  90%  100%  85%  94%  Judge  #3  9 5%  90%  88%  100%  Page A n o t h e r means o f provided  by  an  inquiry  support, although i n t o the  nature  121  indirect, is of  the  judges'  errors. These e r r o r s h a s t e and  appear  to  have been due  were t r i g g e r e d  by  key  judge p l a c e d "How  an  incident  much" i n t h e  whole  realizes  like  incident that  general salary "Stimulated  the  salary and  not  incident  issues  and  consideration  to  example,  interrogative  "Answers s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s  one  words  category."  c o n c e r n e d more w i t h s p e c i f i c  q u e s t i o n s a b o u t o c c u p a t i o n s and  the  words. F o r  w i t h the  However, t h i s c a t e g o r y was  considerations  largely  or  not  specific  shift  just a  work. Upon  few  involves should of  trigger  reading words,  a deliberation  be  placed  in  e x t r i n s i c work  one  about  the  features"  category. As but  was  e x p e c t e d , t h e r e were a  most were q u i t e  independent  clearcut.  few  borderline  In summary,  judges demonstrated  that  the  s y s t e m s have h i g h  r e l i a b i l i t y because of  number o f  most o f  substantive  errors, in  nature.  cases,  the category the  limited  w h i c h were c o r r e c t a b l e  and  not  Page R e l i a b i l i t y as  Validity  Validity  reflects  categories  are  categories  reflect  simply  sound  made up  formulations?  the  extent  to which  the  elicited  not  the they  t o p e r p e t u a t e one's e x i s t i n g t h e o r e t i c a l In t h e  could  s u b j e c t i v e but  through the  i s , do  i n c i d e n t s or a r e  reliability  were s u b s e q u e n t l y c o n f i r m e d  j u d g e s . One  the  or w e l l - f o u n d e d . T h a t  s e c t i o n , i t was  t h a t a l l i n c i d e n t s were subsumed by and  122  conclude rather  confirmation  categorization,  by  that  of  therefore  the  the  attains the  the  noted  category  system  independent  category  system i s  objectivity  judges. R e l i a b l e  gives  categories  an  objective  status.  Comprehens i v e n e s s  Another the  categories  students by  feature are  of v a l i d i t y  i s to determine  comprehensive. That  have g e n e r a t e d  categorizing only  first  (out  from each of  the  remaining  ten students  were c a t e g o r i z e d  a l l their  category  two  25  incidents  and  incidents fitted  system. That  i s , would more  more c a t e g o r i e s ?  the  i s , no  whether  This  of  was  35)  tested  students'  g r o u p s . R e s p o n s e s by only  the  afterwards  i n t o the e x i s t i n g  new  categories  had  to  be  Page formed  t o accommodate t h e s e  provides reasonable  evidence  of the c a t e g o r y system. because t h e r e categories. incident  that one  t o be  fear  and  c a t e g o r y system  unable  new  to the study, a h i n d e r i n g users i s  or c y b e r p h o b i a .  to derive anything  except at  The  from  it.  f o r a few  comments a l o n g  first  that  they q u i c k l y  but  the a i d e  l e a r n e d what t o do.  t h e r e f o r e , to conclude  i s reasonably  that  No  the put  It  the  comprehensive.  of A b s t r a c t i o n  To a c h i e v e t h e r i g h t necessary  t o use  abstracting one  of d i s c o v e r i n g  common among computer  of being confused  seems j u s t i f i a b l e ,  Level  comprehensiveness  o f t h e machine would h i n d e r them s o much  mentioned t h i s ,  them a t e a s e  T h i s check  This claim is provisional  computer p h o b i a  t h e y would be  lines  f o r the  F o r example, p r i o r  thought  1  incidents.  i s always a p o s s i b i l i t y  the s o - c a l l e d students  new  123  level  the p r o t o t y p e s as g u i d e s  f e a t u r e s f r o m whole  i s forced  of a b s t r a c t i o n ,  incidents.  richness  o f r e p o r t s were u n t o u c h e d that  theoretical  rather  than  In t h i s  way,  t o examine t h o r o u g h l y a l l i n c i d e n t s ,  c o m p a r i n g them t o v a r i o u s p r o t o t y p e s . The structure  i t is  language  to conserve  a l l the  t h e y might c o n t a i n . Uncontaminated  overlay that  may  o r may  not  and  undermine  by  a  the  actual  message, t h e  material As  prototype  procedure  f o r the  actual  is valid  establishes  order  level  i f they s t r i v e  but  yet  a  level  for a  level  c l e a r l y subsumes  categories  too  numerous t o h a n d l e e f f e c t i v e l y .  superordinate  r e a l l y give  specific  us  direction  two  features  Basis  of e x t r i n s i c  of  that  possibility  could  advantage a group of  i n the  that  evolve  critical  categories  people r e p o r t  seems r e a s o n a b l e t h a t  (Tables  E a r n i n g s and  high For do  not  of a  lower  example,  work f e a t u r e s "  are  incidents reported  When s e v e r a l  be  For  of  could  travel  i n t o new  are  still only  categories.  Categories  Inherent  can  the  Too  categories  because they are  of a b s t r a c t i o n always e x i s t s .  g e n e r a t e many c a t e g o r i e s .  that  simplicity.  facilitative  enough. N a t u r a l l y ,  "Consideration  of  would p r o d u c e a m u l t i t u d e  g e n e r a t e s a type of a r t i f i c a l  example, t h e  set  the  low  level  the  of a b s t r a c t i o n , the  Too  not  that  insures  incidents.  level  124  i s conserved.  categories  a  Page  viewed  from the  the  the  formed by by  same t y p e o f  the  on  is  similarities  independent  category  tables  1 - 2 - 3 - 4 ) , most o f  incident technique  of  people. incident, i t  i s well-founded.  participation  categories  the  have  rates  As  Page 125 considerable  support, both  i n c i d e n t s and p e r c e n t a g e report  i n t e r m s o f number o f  of s t u d e n t s . Independent  t h e same k i n d o f f a c i l i t a t i o n  people  or h i n d r a n c e  with  CHOICES and t h e SDS. The e x c e p t i o n s c a n r e a d i l y be supported  through  a common-sensical  example, t h e " G u i d e s o n l y two i n c i d e n t s . stated their  viewpoint. For  i n f o r m a t i o n s e a r c h " c a t e g o r y had However, b o t h  and were p o w e r f u l  incidents  yet different  were  enough t o f o r m  own c a t e g o r y . And i t seems q u i t e s e n s i b l e  guided  clearly  i n f o r m a t i o n s e a r c h would be b e n e f i c i a l  that a  t o someone  planning a career. The  face v a l i d i t y  important  source  categorization surprising  of the c a t e g o r i e s i s another  of confidence t o support the  scheme. T h e r e  about  i s n o t h i n g s h o c k i n g or  these c a t e g o r i e s . In f a c t ,  c o n c e i v a b l y come up w i t h s i m i l a r examination  of each  example, t h a t sense  a c a t e g o r y such  c a t e g o r i e s by a  careful  I t seems e v i d e n t , f o r  a s "Narrows f o c u s " makes  f o r b o t h CHOICES and SDS. CHOICES r e d u c e s  occupations letter  intervention.  one c o u l d  1114  t o 25 o c c u p a t i o n s w h i l e t h e SDS, t h r o u g h t h e  code, a l s o  narrows the f o c u s .  Page Position  One  of R e p o r t e r s  to Report  c l a i m to v a l i d i t y  stems from the  people  Valid  noted  students  i n t e r v i e w e d were e n r o l l e d  prior  t o the  have some i n t e r e s t s , their  (1954)  r e p o r t i n g i n c i d e n t s . Are  t o make f i r s t  course  Incidents  by F l a n a g a n  position  hand r e p o r t s ? The  study. and  in a  seventy  in a career  d e s i r e some h e l p  a c a r e e r would seem t o be  they  planning  This presupposes t h a t  career. Their s e n s i t i v i t y  126  they  in planning  t o problems of  sharpened  because of  question,  i s the  planning their  involvement. In c o n c e r t w i t h invalidation  this  of s e l f - r e p o r t s .  however, t h a t s e l f - r e p o r t s that,  i n some c a s e s ,  measures. H o l l a n d  and  Johnson  self-reports objective  as  be  accurate  accurate  m e a s u r e s when t h e  in predicting  that  interests. direct  s u p e r i o r to  criteria  were s u p p l i e d by  and  self-reported  o b j e c t i v e l y measured  (1972) c o n c l u d e d  evidence,  than o b j e c t i v e  shown t h a t  were c o n s i s t e n t l y  characteristics  i s growing  indeed  more a c c u r a t e  i n t e r e s t s are about twice  Scott  can  (1978) has  f u t u r e v o c a t i o n s as  There  traditional  indirect  for personality  friends.  Page Agreement w i t h  Research  Another aspect extent will  chapter,  from  has  not  s t u d i e s tend  elicited the  i s to determine  from  category  reported  by  the  review  of  r e s e a r c h . For  "Considered  Wright  Turgeon  (1979) f o c u s e d  literature  example, t h e c o n t e n t  Guerette  (1981) i n t h e i r on  reality  questions" category e m p h a s i s . He  to s p e c i f i c  (1981),  testing,  general  resembles  q u e s t i o n s about  occupations  them. The  j o b o p t i o n s " was  reported  eight  s t u d i e s (Donovan, 1980;  1980;  Jarvis,  1984;  Van  Zoost,  A similar specific  1978;  Laird,  1982;  Wright,  category,  field,"  was  one  Sloan,  the  "Answers  to  without  reality respond having  "Expands by  1981;  Gosse,  1982;  Stahl,  1981).  "Expands  mentioned  of  i n v a r i o u s forms  Guerette,  1982;  was  CHOICES.  Turgeon's  category  of  Sloan  s t u d i e s with  s t r e s s e d CHOICES a b i l i t y  to a c t u a l l y experience  However,  the c a t e g o r i e s  f u n c t i o n s o f t h e CHOICES s y s t e m . The  testing  from  educational requirements"  (1981),  and  specific  first  investigated.  to g e n e r a l l y support  (1980),  prime  i n the  been a d e q u a t e l y  Donovan  section  SDS.  noted  this  the  past research. This  examine r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h f o r s u p p o r t ,  CHOICES, a s  the  of v a l i d i t y  of c o r r o b o r a t i o n w i t h  CHOICES t h e n  127  job o p t i o n s  i n three  in a  of these  studies  Page (Guerette, study  was  1981; found  reflected  to  i n the  1 9 8 1 ) . The  that reported  o n l y noted  Guerette,  Similarly,  most o f t h e  of s u p p o r t  from the  to  support: 1982;  Five  Lack  information  other  1980;  work  The  1978). had  a scattering  o n l y two  j o b s " and  lacking  "Matches  categories  had  fewer m e n t i o n s  nine  categories  enlisted  information  (Guerette,  1980;  (West 1 9 8 1 ) , Rushed on  1 9 8 0 ) , and 1980;  independent support  the  Laird,  basis  Stedham, 1 9 8 2 ) . T h i s validity  for  terminal  Machine m a l f u n c t i o n  f o r the  in  occupational  (Stedham, 1 9 8 2 ) , Q u e s t i o n a b l e  Sloan,  features,"  articles  categories  f u t u r e of  of the  of  jobs  (Guerette,  most i n c i d e n t s ,  Jarvis,  Stedham, 1 9 8 2 ) , U n r e l i a b l e  narrowing  the  (Guerette,  jobs." ^  hindering  literature.  1981;  one  narrowing  i n three  literature.  were "Judged  The  1980). Only  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of e x t r i n s i c  (Donovan, 1980;  interests  Sloan,  "Narrows f o c u s " c a t e g o r y  surprisingly,  support  1978;  f o r m a l l y s t a t e the  category  "Stimulated was,  Jarvis,  128  of  (Guerette,  supplies these  categor i e s . The research focused rather  SDS  c a t e g o r i e s are  a l s o supported  studies. Unfortunately, on  than  validating  Holland's  i n v e s t i g a t i n g the  by  many  most s t u d i e s  have  theoretical  overall  assumptions  effects  of  the  Page inventory.  Of  the  over  200  approximately  10  SDS  planning.  on  career  illustrate this  and  s t u d i e s , there  t h a t a c t u a l l y s t r e s s the  add  are  only  effects  T h e s e however, s e r v e  weight to the  categories  129  of  the  to outlined in  research. The  two  job options  facilitative and  were s u p p o r t e d  expands job o p t i o n s by  (1975) , H o l l a n d (1979), T a l b o t  categories  Avallone  "Expands  in a s p e c i f i c  (1974), Cole  (1974, 1 9 7 6 a ) , P r e d i g e r and  Birk  ( 1 9 7 9 ) , and  general  and  field"  Hanson  (1972),  Zener and  Takai  Schnuelle  (1976) . Provoking underlined  thought about c a r e e r  by a number o f s t u d i e s  & Hanson, 1975;  Holland  R e a r d o n e t a l . , 1982;  1973,  Talbot  The of  the  search focus  t o the  for a career  the  1972;  drew s u p p o r t  Talbot  similar  Holland,  offers career  to other  justifies  choice"  types  to give  by  narrowing  1974,  of  choice. falls  f r o m many  need  & B i r k , 1979). They  m e a s u r e s , a l s o measured c u r r e n t " C o n f i r m s or  1972;  "Stimulates  a certain direction  & Hanson, 1975;  SDS,  Cole  category.  "Narrows f o c u s " c a t e g o r y  (Cole  1974;  & B i r k , 1979.) T h i s  same s t u d i e s w h i c h s t r e s s e d t h e  Prediger, that  (Avallone,  was  1976a; P r e d i g e r ,  a n o t h e r measure o f c r e d i b i l i t y deliberation"  planning  the the  1976a; found  interest The  category  into t h i s  domain  of  Page reassurance.  Other s t u d i e s a l s o r e a f f i r m  Hanson, 1975;  Holland,  R e a r d o n , e t a l . , 1982; Holland's behind  the  this  (Cole  1974;  1976a; P r e d i g e r ,  1972;  Zener  & Schnuelle,  view of c a r e e r  SDS,  seems t o be  facilitative  c a t e g o r i e s uncovered  interviewed.  The  capabilities  t o j o b s , Matches  Matches  i n t e r e s t s and  Holland's The such  s t r e s s on  i n the  two  students  matching c a t e g o r i e s  capabilities  to  to  (Matching jobs  jobs)  b i a s e s and  main c r i t i c i s m s  the v a r i o u s  lending  literature  occupation. reported points  l a c k of s c o r i n g r e l i a b i l i t y of the  however, t h e  categories  The  and  parallel  m a t c h i n g p e r s o n a l i t y and  s t u d i e s surveyed.  Generally,  thereby  the  interests  stands  the  s e v e n h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s were n o t  sex-related the  three  by  in  as  to as  SDS.  literature  i n both  &  1982).  d e c i s i o n which  reflected  130  seems t o  CHOICES and  independent support  the  to v a l i d a t e  support  SDS these  categor i e s .  Validity  as  Usefulness  Another aspect inspected  i s usefulness. This  was  two  means; by  personally interviewing  three  counsellors with  extensive  experience  and  the  SDS,  by  of v a l i d i t y  and  by s e n d i n g  with  a questionnaire  CHOICES  (see  Appendix  Page N),  based  on t h e c a t e g o r i e s  found  in this  study,  131  t o 126  schools. Three c o u n s e l l o r s , experienced SDS,  were  interviewed  with  the r e s u l t s  safeguards  with  CHOICES and t h e  e x t e n s i v e l y and were  of t h i s  study  presented  i n t h e f o r m o f maps and  ( A p p e n d i x K, L, and M). T h e y were  asked  w h e t h e r t h e c a t e g o r i e s w o u l d be u s e f u l i n a n t i c i p a t i n g what e a c h p r o g r a m d o e s and what c o u l d prepare prospective The the More their  these  appreciated  importantly, energies  learning  students.  c o u n s e l l o r s expressed  students  their  reassurance  the worthwhileness  n o t o n l y were s t u d e n t s  on p l a n n i n g  the career  a career,  planning  process  of  that CHOICES.  concentrating  but they  were  as e v i d e n c e d  also by  maps. While acknowledging the v a l i d i t y  categories, "Future  they  d i d underline  of j o b s " category.  were n o t g i v e n to  be done t o b e t t e r  t h e weakness o f t h e  They f e l t  enough u p - t o - d a t e  properly validate future  o f most o f t h e  that the  or c u r r e n t  job prospects.  students  information The  S a f e g u a r d s s e c t i o n , however, was e m p h a s i z e d  for  usefulness  CHOICES  training  i n i m p l e m e n t i n g t h e p r o g r a m . Two  instructors  a l s o s t r e s s e d the u t i l i t y  Safeguards s e c t i o n i n t r a i n i n g This  independent c o n f i r m a t i o n  prospective  its  of the  counsellors.  a s t o what CHOICES  Page 132 a c t u a l l y does balances theoretical As agreed the test  aspects  of the c o u n s e l l o r  preparation.  f o r t h e SDS, t h e c o u n s e l l o r s a l s o g e n e r a l l y with  the v a r i o u s  categories  c l a r i t y and s p e c i f i c i t y elicits  does h e l p s  found. They s t r e s s e d  t h a t each s e c t i o n o f the  from s t u d e n t s .  what t h e t e s t the  and adds w e i g h t t o t h e  Having a c l e a r e r p i c t u r e of  them i n p r e p a r i n g  students f o r  i n t e r v e n t i o n . T h e y were n o t s u r p r i s e d b y a n y o f t h e  SDS c a t e g o r i e s . The SAFEGUARDS appreciated students  a s i t would be a p p l i c a b l e t o  t o the f u z z i e r  Counsellor what e l s e c o u l d career,  s e c t i o n was  aspects  or safeguard  especially gratified  existing  section, that i s ,  students  was e n t h u s i a s t i c . T h e y p l a n  implement  forewarning  o f t h e SDS.  r e a c t i o n t o t h e OTHER be done t o h e l p  especially  plan  their  t o use t h e l i s t t o  p r o g r a m s . T h e y were  t o see the " S t a r t planning  sooner"  category. A s e c o n d means o f i n s p e c t i n g t h e u s e f u l n e s s categories  o f CHOICES and t h e SDS was t h r o u g h a  questionnaire  sent  t o 126 s c h o o l s ,  CHOICES, f r o m t h e Lower M a i n l a n d This  of the  questionnaire  practitioners  attempted  listed  as  of B r i t i s h  to e l i c i t  having Columbia.  from  ( s e e t a b l e 7) whether t h e y  agreed,  disagreed  o r were u n d e c i d e d a b o u t t h e v a r i o u s  distilled  from t h i s  study.  That  i s , they  experienced  categories  were a s k e d  Page whether t h e y t h o u g h t similar As  categories  that  their  from T a b l e s  (pp.136-138), the c o u n s e l l o r s  quite  facilitative  interviewed this  categories of jobs"  this  incidence  their  technique  counsellors  reservation  concerning  offers  i t srichness.  can  detect  the s o l i d  1, p.50) t h a t  career  to the  comprise  planning  knowing  concerning  described  this  i n c i d e n t s , one incidents  t h e c a t e g o r y . The  some s t u d e n t s a l s o  will  to be  expressed  o f some o c c u p a t i o n s and  as l e s s h e l p f u l t o t h e i r  by t h e h i n d e r i n g  students  and f a c i l i t a t i v e  i f an o c c u p a t i o n  the future  information."  Referring to  o f t h e 14  i t was c o m f o r t i n g  disbelief  occupational  the a c t u a l  foundation  i n demand. P a r a d o x i c a l l y ,  evidenced  in a  i s p r e c i s e l y where t h e c r i t i c a l  of the category,  that  f o r the  c a t e g o r y d o e s n o t f i t i n t h e CHOICES  source  as  8, p.136) e x c e p t  c a t e g o r y . The t h r e e  the  emphasized  was  interviewed.  f i n d i n g m i g h t be i n t e r p r e t e d  p r o g r a m . However, t h i s  their  reaction  o f ways. I t would seem t h a t , a c c o r d i n g  counsellors,  (Table  with the  a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e CHOICES  (Table  a l s o expressed  category. This  variety  g e n e r a l l y agreed  counsellors  t h e y had s t r o n g  "Judges f u t u r e  8 and 9  f o r both programs. T h e i r  s i m i l a r to the three  Specifically,  generate  (Appendix E ) .  c a n be o b s e r v e d  category system  s t u d e n t s would  133  category  career  planning,  "Unreliable  Page This This  problem  i s a nice  technique. rather  illustration  agreement o f f e r e d  f o r t h e " N e e d i n g more o p t i o n s "  t o unanimous s u p p o r t counsellors  hinders  facilitative  do n o t r e a l l y  by t h e c o u n s e l l o r s category. This  find  that  much  close that  that  w i t h CHOICES. In t h e  and h i n d e r i n g again  categories for  f o r CHOICES seems t o s u g g e s t  or i s not h e l p f u l  counsellors  incident  why.  to the remaining hindering  CHOICES, t h e o n l y  the  of the c r i t i c a l  section.  them and one g e t s a c l e a r e r p i c t u r e o f  what happened and  Turning  was  i n the Safeguards  I t doesn't average out d i f f e r e n c e s , but  underlines  actually  i s stressed  134  expressed  categories their  f o r t h e SDS, t h e  general  agreement.  Page Table  135  7  Years of experience  of c o u n s e l l o r s responding  to  questionnaire  3  Years of  4  5  6  7  exper i e n c e : Experience CHOICES  SDS  both  with 7  5  4  1  2  0  0  0  0  1  32  with  only:  Experience  TOTAL  indicated  only:  Experience  not  with  CHOICES:  2  0  7  8  5  2  4  1  28  SDS  1  4  3  4  5  3  7  1  (28)  Number  of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s answered  Number  of questionnaires  returned  : unanswered:  61 3  TOTAL r e t u r n e d  :  TOTAL s e n t  : 126  Percentage  of returned  Average y e a r s  experience  64  :50.8% :4.2yrs  Page Table  136  8  Summary o f  counsellors reaction  to  the  CHOICES  Categories C H O I C E S Facilitative  Categories  1.  Expands g e n e r a l  2.  Expands job specific  Agree  options  options  Disagree  Undecided  54  1  5  45  6  9  44  11  5  in a  field  3.  Narrows  4.  Answers s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s  46  9  5  5.  Judges f u t u r e  17  28  15  6.  Provides reference  50  4  6  50  2  8  51  4  5  51  3  6  31  14  15  38  10  12  36  4  20  future 7.  focus  of  jobs for  planning  Considers  occupational  requirements 8.  Stimulates extrinsic (salary,  consideration work hours,  features etc.)  9.  Clarifies  likes  10.  Clarifies  capabilities  aptitudes 11.  Matches  interest  aptitudes 12.  Confirms choices  of  and  and  Page 13.  Disconfirms  Hindering  choices  137  19  15  26  categories  1.  Lack  of  information  17  33  10  2.  Useless  information  9  42  9  3.  Unreliable  13  33  14  10  27  18  30  10  occupational  information 4.  Fails  to confirm  a  prior  choice 5.  P u z z l i n g and  inappropriate  job  options 6.  20  Questionable  basis  for  narrowing  jobs 7.  Needs more o p t i o n s  8.  Rushed on  9.  Machine m a l f u n c t i o n  Any  other  terminal  category none  you  would  19  27  14  39  11  10  9  49  2  16  41  3  like  to  add  Page Table  9  Summary o f c o u n s e l l o r s r e a c t i o n t o t h e S E L F Facilitative  D I R E C T E D Categories  1.  Expands g e n e r a l  2.  Expands j o b o p t i o n s specific  Agree  job o p t i o n  27  field  1  1  4  4  6  Guides  27  5.  Considers  information search  1  1  educational  requirement or c l a r i f i e s  14  14  1  25  3  1  9  14  6  26  2  1  19  4  6  9  11  9  12  12  5  27  2  0  likes  dislikes  Confirms  Undecided  8  4.  7.  Disagree  17 19  and  categories  in a  Narrows f o c u s  Confirms  SDS  S E A R C H  3.  6.  138  or d i s c o v e r s  capabilities  or  incapabilities 8.  Stimulates deliberation  9.  Understanding  oneself  over  time 10.  F i n d out  where t o  11.  Matches c a p a b i l i t e s  to  12.  Matches  interest  to  jobs  13.  Matches  interest  and  capabilities  improve  to jobs  jobs  15  9  5  Page 14. C o n f i r m s o r j u s t i f i e s  1.  Hindering  categories  Lack  misleading  or  occupational 2.  choice  information  interests  3.  Irrelevance  4.  U n r e l i a b i l i t y of  o f some i t e m s  self-estimates F a i l s to provide  Need e x p a n s i o n o f finder  7.  15  7  8  5  6  13  10  12  6  10  21  11  3  12  11  4  26  2  0  15  4  8  specific  direction 6.  4  Mis i d e n t i f i c a t i o n / m i s d i r e c t i o n of  5.  20  139  No new  information  Any o t h e r  category  options  y o u would l i k e  t o add  Page 140 In summary, a number o f i s s u e s reliability examined  and t h e v a l i d i t y  ranging  of a b s t r a c t i o n ,  position and  of the c a t e g o r i e s  from the t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s  judges, the comprehensiveness level  regarding  the usefulness  been  by i n d e p e n d e n t  of c a t e g o r i z a t i o n , the  t h e agreement w i t h  for counsellors.  Generally,  have been s u c c e s s f u l l y r e s o l v e d .  Therefore,  some w a r r a n t  and v a l i d i t y  categories.  have  of the c a t e g o r i e s , the  the basis  of the r e p o r t e r s ,  the  f o r the r e l i a b i l i t y  research, these  there i s of these  Page  141  CHAPTER 8  Discussion  The  purpose of  practice  of c a r e e r  ameliorate was  the  events  that  the  the  be  interventions.  CHOICES and  the  This  process SDS.  This  and  to b u i l d  in safeguards.  contribution  A  is outlined  i n c l u d i n g l i m i t a t i o n s of  the  implications  in  study, for  research. f o r CHOICES, c r i t i c a l  interviews  resulted  facilitate  and  64  career  planning.  and  that  i n 218  hindering  For  hinder  SDS,  categories.  fourteen  hinder  there  career  events ( o r do  were 298  planning.  incident  The  that not  that  w h i l e the  facilitative  Independent  SDS and  incidents seven  j u d g e s were a b l e  help) facilitate  incidents  to t h i r t e e n f a c i l i t a t i v e  categories,  to  reported  events that  CHOICES were r e d u c e d  reduced  the  c a t e g o r i z a t i o n of  f o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s and  Specifically,  96  within  improve  i n p a r t i c u l a r to  prominent  of the  f o l l o w i n g pages  implications  to  e n a b l e s p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o a n t i c i p a t e what  assessment  further  two  through the  outcomes w i l l  critical  of  take place  categorization  s t u d y was  c o u n s e l l i n g and  use  accomplished  this  and  for nine  were  hindering  to r e l i a b l y  use  Page these that  categories  to place  i n c i d e n t s . T h i s would  t h e c a t e g o r i e s were a r e a s o n a b l e  events. a map  That  i s , the c a t e g o r i e s  planning  f o r each program  but l a r g e l y  facilitate  career  stress  work  planning  s y s t e m s r e v e a l s some  in distinctive  ways. CHOICES  c o n s t r a i n t s , s p e c i f i c i t y and  f e a t u r e s . SDS,  self-awareness  qualitative  t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n s seem t o  seems t o s t r e s s r e a l i t y extrinsic  provide  or not h e l p  ( A p p e n d i x K, L and M). A  c o m p a r i s o n between t h e two c a t e g o r y overlap,  indicate  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of  o f what e a c h p r o g r a m d o e s t o h e l p  career  142  i n c o n t r a s t , seems t o  and u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of the matching  process.  Limitations There a r e s e v e r a l l i m i t a t i o n s interpreting  the r e s u l t s .  participated  in this  had  cannot  reason  the students  who  e x p e r i m e n t were v o l u n t e e r s .  enrolled i n a career  no s a l i e n t  First,  to consider i n  guidance course.  While  Each there i s  for believing that generalizations  be made t o s t u d e n t s  of a s i m i l a r  socio-cultural  b a c k g r o u n d , g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s a r e p r e m a t u r e and would be better  made on t h e b a s i s o f o t h e r  kinds  of  research.  Second, a person can o n l y r e p o r t as f a c i l i t a t i v e hindering recognizes  those  e v e n t s t h a t he o r s h e i s aware o f o r  as important.  The e v e n t s r e p o r t e d  were  or  Page limited for  by s t u d e n t s  1  a w a r e n e s s and  recognizing significant  by t h e i r  events.  or h i n d e r  career planning  beyond  students*  capacity to report.  the  Third, s y s t e m and The  there the  present  particular  study  reasonably clear each c a r e e r assess the  and  and  be  improved  understanding  improvements t o be  shown t h a t t h e  p l a n n i n g . At  indications  have t o be  SDS  over  produced  present,  the  with the  yet to  SDS  time  may  types  or  of  its  shown t h a t was  an  related  i t would  depth  evidence  to  affect  provides  done t o a s s e s s  or s i g n i f i c a n c e  in career  to  have  of the s t r e n g t h of p a r t i c u l a r c a t e g o r i e s ,  priority  be  may  understanding  in sufficient  much more would have t o be  relative  f o r the  done t o d e t e r m i n e  of s e l f  to  of  i n c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . Second,  f r e q u e n t l y enough or career  time"  i t would  used  means i s t h a t  i n c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . Two  First,  a  were a l s o c o n c e r n e d  example, t h e c a t e g o r y  s t u d i e s would have t o be significance.  to e s t a b l i s h  o f e a c h c a t e g o r y has  o n e s e l f over  important  system.  various procedures  validity  significance  "understanding  category  comprehensive c a t e g o r y system f o r  c a t e g o r i e s as a w h o l e . What t h i s  demonstrated. For  but  between a  categories within a  i n t e r v e n t i o n . The  and  might  i n ways t h a t were  i n v o l v e s an a t t e m p t  reliability  validity  not  is a difference  capability  Both programs  facilitate  143  their  planning.  Page  144  Implications  Theoretically, of g e n e r a l For as  concepts  example, the "Matches  to  Bordin, self  time",  "Find  the  people think  factors  out  support  technique  on  the  that  and  features"  i t i s important  careers  what p e o p l e  (Wooler report  a broad  use  of  the  critical  i s rather  programs have t e n d e d  a number o f v a r i a b l e s t o d i s c o v e r The  typical  & as  range  of  have  research  design  t o be a r b i t r a r y  i f any of  incident  novel.  d i s j o i n t e d . R e s e a r c h e r s have t r a d i t i o n a l l y  occurs.  in  beneficial.  f o r program e v a l u a t i o n  of c a r e e r  one  The  work  which c o u n s e l l i n g p s y c h o l o g i s t s  Methodologically,  and  (1972).  to support  t o be  &  "Understand  improve"  of e x t r i n s i c  about t h e i r  claimed  person's  developmental t h e o r i s t s  Ginzberg  notion  such  support  Williamson  s u c h as  where t o  i n c i d e n t s tend  traditionally  Studies  jobs"  1909;  number  matching  emphasize matching a  Wisudhua, 1 9 8 5 ) . In g e n e r a l , facilitating  a  counselling.  with  a t t i t u d e s to  consideration  supported  of c a r e e r  (Parson,  (1957) and  to confirm  concerned  categories  categories  Super  category helping  categories  job c o n d i t i o n s  "stimulates  field  t h e o r i s t s who  confirmation s u c h as  i n the  1941). Other  over  r e s u l t s tend  i n t e r e s t s and  trait-factor traits  the  focused  change  pre-test,  Page i n t e r v e n t i o n and  post-test  coherent  fashion.  would be  appropriate  analysis.  This  evaluation  has  Ballantine  be  tended  CACGS as  critical  i n t e r v e n t i o n a c t u a l l y does t o h e l p In t h i s  technique  o f f e r s three as  context,  the  other  on  i t provides  often  f o r the  of CHOICES and  SDS  appreciation,  critical  facilitative  programs. For  programs are  were d e s i g n e d  the  people  o f what in  the  events that  grounds  as  reveal  n a r r o w i n g and  advantage  rather  of s e e i n g  t h a n how  rivals,  distinct other  In t h i s  made. The  two  their  own  intervention  distinct. the  The  way,  sets merit.  an  as  and  i f they  comparison differences  variables consideration  indicates  that  categories  give  i n t e r v e n t i o n as  i t performs against  criteria.  on  quite  occur  for  same p u r p o s e . A r e c e n t  f o r each  t h e s e programs are the  career  e x a m p l e , CHOICES, SDS  treated  does n o t  on  categories  the  incident  ( R e a r d o n e t a l . , 1 9 8 2 ) . However, a c a r e f u l of  based  advantages.  of  a program. Second,  distinguishing  incident  of  results indicate, i t offers a  r e a s o n a b l y b r o a d map in  in a  value  p r a c t i t i o n e r s l a c k a map  planning.  up  done w i t h a q u a l i t a t i v e t y p e  s i m i l a r to t h i s  First,  t o add  (1986) c o n c l u d e s t h a t i t  to evaluate  could  study. Generally,  not  145  it is,  artificial  a q u a l i t a t i v e comparison can  of c a t e g o r i e s I f the  two  can  sets  be  freely  be  compared  of c a t e g o r i e s  are  Page similar,  t h e n a q u a n t i t a t i v e c o m p a r i s o n c a n be made.  Third, mirror plot  t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s seems t o  the l o g i c  o f t h e p r o g r a m s . E a c h p r o g r a m has a  o r a p l a n . F o r example,  SDS  clarifies  an  occupational  code and t h e n u s e s t h a t code t o n a r r o w  occupational  fields  fields. as  and expand  The m a j o r s t e p s  important  one c o u l d report  146  As a n o t h e r  o f CHOICES d e c i d e d  questions  careful  consideration,  system to a l l o w  and r e c e i v e an  example,  upon an  or more  t o be v i e w e d  a n t i c i p a t e what p e o p l e  as f a c i l i t a t i v e .  than a batch  i n one  i n a program tend  events that, a f t e r  conceivably  developer  options  would the  interactive  p e o p l e t o ask  rather  specific  immediate r e s p o n s e . And,  as  m i g h t have been a n t i c i p a t e d , p e o p l e r e p o r t e d p o s i t i v e events  i n being  questions.  What t h i s  investigations that  able  tend  why  should  or n o t i t p r o m o t e s evaluation maturity,  suggests,  however t h a t t o know how  program, these d o e s do and was  questions intended  these tend  r e s t s upon  search? upon an  i s defined?  variables  to f a c i l i t a t e .  t h e w o r t h o f SDS information  to t h e i r  i s t h a t a number o f  not designed  o f CHOICES d e p e n d s  interesting  answers  t o go a s t r a y by t e s t i n g  t h e p r o g r a m was  example,  to get s p e c i f i c  For whether  Or t h a t t h e increase  i n career  While i t might  variables rate to overlook  be  i n each  what a p r o g r a m  t o d o . T h e r e seems t o be a  Page 147 misleading relevant  e m p h a s i s upon v a r i a b l e s t h a t a r e l e s s  t o each program. I n c o n t r a s t , t h e c a t e g o r i c a l  maps a r e v e r y c o m m o n - s e n s i c a l . T h e y g r o u n d effectiveness This  serves  irrelevant variables  i n what i s most o b v i o u s  perhaps as a reminder  that  i t c a n be r a t h e r  t h a t were n o t b u i l t there  into  the program  design.  a r e two major i m p l i c a t i o n s .  CHOICES and SDS emerge f r o m t h i s  different  reasonable.  t o base e f f e c t i v e n e s s upon t h e o r e t i c a l  Practically, First  and  program  study  i n t e r v e n t i o n s as i l l u s t r a t e d  as q u i t e  i n chapter s i x .  Some o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n c l u d e t h a t CHOICES s t r e s s e s ease o f a c c e s s  to s p e c i f i c  generalizes,that effective and  in cultivating  choice  with  than the  comparison).  f o r general  and d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g  t o move f r o m t h e g e n e r a l  complete  t o c o n f i r m or  decisions regarding  SDS seems more v a l u a b l e  planning.  CHOICES,  CHOICES seems more a p p r o p r i a t e f o r  and s p e c i f i c  understanding  than  more c r e d i b i l i t y  (see Appendix 0 f o r a g r a p h i c  planning the  self-awareness  t h a t CHOICES seems t o be a b l e  Therefore,  t h e SDS  t h e SDS seems much more c o n c e r n e d and  disconfirm a prior SDS  information while  It follows that t h e SDS p r i o r  options  while  exploration,  fields.  t o the s p e c i f i c  One  tends  i n career  i t would be a d v a n t a g e o u s t o  t o CHOICES.  Second, the c a t e g o r y  systems provide  maps o f e a c h  Page 148 intervention each  that  a counsellor  i s apt to f a c i l i t a t e  One p r a c t i c a l informed career  or hinder  a d v a n t a g e o f maps s u c h a s t h e s e ,  i s a more  f o r p l a c i n g each program w i t h i n  to coordinate  more i n f o r m e d client's  how  progress.  program. A c o u n s e l l o r  or f i l l  to anticipate a client's  basis  position lacks  allow  other  would be i n a  better  interventions  to  gaps. Another advantage basis  a larger  supply  t o t h e s e maps  is a  f o r p r o g r a m s e l e c t i o n t o meet a  p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n . F o r example,  i f specific  information  was a p r o m i n e n t n e e d , CHOICES would be a n  appropriate  intervention. I f general  exploration  required,  t h e SDS would be c o n v e n i e n t . A t h i r d  advantage  o f maps  i s that  a counsellor  was  practical  can s t r i v e t o  m a x i m i z e p r o g r a m b e n e f i t s and m i n i m i z e d e t r i m e n t s . facilitate clients  use o f a p r o g r a m , one c a n p r e p a r e  more a p p r o p r i a t e l y .  safeguards 1.  full  f o r CHOICES  underline  especially  reduces  give  is to:  "This  of the T r a v e l  doesn't matter  Guide,  t o me"  which  t o bypass the f e a t u r e .  a c l e a r example o f how t h e computer  i t s bank o f 1114 o c c u p a t i o n s t o 25, s t r e s s i n g a  bargaining 3.  F o r example, a summary o f  the importance  the clause  enables the c l i e n t 2.  To  mentality.  inform  occupations,  clients  o f t h e meaning o f t h e s t a r r e d  how t o r e s e a r c h  an o c c u p a t i o n  using the  CCDO number and 4. one  teach  answered  confirmed  the  lack  clients  the  of c o l l e g e  how  questions  or d i s c o n f i r m e d .  (1985) c o n c l u s i o n  why  149  to discover  how  information.  to backtrack, and  Page  the  prior  choice  T h i s a l s o emphasizes  t h a t people can  negotiate  is  Herr's  their  own  future. 5.  s t r e s s the  garbage  "garbage i n ,  out."  6.  e n c o u r a g e an  bargaining, more  o l d computer adage  a t t i t u d e of e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n ,  of a c c e s s i n g  other  routes  and  of  rescheduling  time. 7.  forewarn c l i e n t s  overlook  discrepencies  of the  lack  of u p d a t i n g  in salary level  and  and  to  i n employment  outlook. 8.  warn c l i e n t s  suggested  those.  view t h a t  This  (Herr  Sampson & P y l e ,  1983).  use  counsellor  only  1. finder  i s to counter-balance  & Best,  1984;  with  a  f o r the  SDS  letter  be  1986;  qualified 1984).  are  to:  d e l i n e a t e ways o f m u l t i p l y i n g o p t i o n s s u c h as  can  the  i t must  Loesch,  Caulum, & Sampson,  safeguards  has  i t d o e s n ' t mean t h e y  in conjunction  (Engels,  Corresponding  b e c a u s e a computer  i f i t ' s from a computer,  more l e g i t i m a t e  9.  just  c e r t a i n occupations,  only research popular  that  code r e a r r a n g e m e n t and  in  the  utilization  Page of  t h e CCDO 2.  150  number.  s t r e s s t h e need t o show s e l f - e s t i m a t e s t o  f a m i l y and f r i e n d s . 3.  lower e x p e c t a t i o n s  generality predict  read  (Holland, 5.  of the instrument,  the s p e c i f i c  4.  that  job, only  Holland's  four  describe  i t i s not designed to  the d i r e c t i o n .  safeguards to the c l i e n t  the numerical  system of the  levels.  Implications  f o r Future  There a r e s e v e r a l this area.  First,  Research  possibilities  future  studies  for future  Also, the  c o m p r e h e n s i v e n e s s o f e a c h c a t e g o r i c a l map  r e a s o n a b l y comprehensive, d e v e l o p norms  who  requires  investigation.  Second, assuming the c a t e g o r i e s  might  research  would be d e s i r a b l e  t o v a l i d a t e and r e f i n e t h e c a t e g o r i e s .  further  on t h e  1979, p. 4 - 5 ) .  educational  in  by i n s i s t i n g  f o r each  illustrate,  have had t h e i r  "Answers s p e c i f i c  a r e s o u n d and  i t would be p o s s i b l e t o  i n t e r v e n t i o n . That  i s , norms  f o r example, t h e p e r c e n t a g e career  planning  questions"  facilitated  category  of people by t h e  i n CHOICES. Or  norms m i g h t d i f f e r e n t i a t e t h e p e r c e n t a g e s o f v a r i o u s  age  Page groups t h a t this  way,  least  were h e l p e d  one  can  particular categories.  d e t e r m i n e what  In  i s most p r o b a b l e  and  probable. Third,  evaluate  the  pre-test,  (1978) work on post-test  intervention, category  categories  satisfaction c a t e g o r y . For  s e r v e as  clients  can  clients  CHOICES, How  rate  example, t h e  Before the  life,  the  they received  question,  How  is a  importance After  from  actual of  each  the  t h e i r degree  client,  to  method, a d a p t e d  planning.  help  scales  q u a l i t y of  rate  can  w i t h the  "Clarifies  One  evaluation.  CHOICES, a n s w e r s t h e  received  the  for t h e i r career  intervention,  category  can  program e f f e c t i v e n e s s .  Flanagan's  that  by  151  of  i n each  before  accessing  important  is  the  i n t e r e s t " t o you? Then, a f t e r  satisfied  in clarifying  are  you  your  w i t h the  help  you  i n t e r e s t s ? I t would  t h i s would g e n e r a t e a d i r e c t e v a l u a t i o n  of  seem the  program. Fourth,  i s the  effectiveness  enhanced  when p e o p l e a r e  benefits  and  properly  of  by  the  way  intervention  prepared  m i n i m i z e d e t r i m e n t s ? Can  enhance e f f e c t i v e n e s s  each  to  maximize  counsellors  people are  prepared  them? Last, (for  i f enough p r o g r a m s or  example P a s s a g e s by  even l i f e  histories,  Sheehy, 1 9 7 6 ) , were  for  Page i n v e s t i g a t e d , a very comprehensive facilitates  and h i n d e r s  career  established. Conceivably, organize  the f i e l d  planning  such a l i s t  of c a r e e r  and/or  could  be  would h e l p  be a  to f a c i l i t a t e  a b r o a d e r base f o r t h e o r i e s of c a r e e r  to  broadly  broader  f o r an o r d e r l y , c o o r d i n a t e d  use o f programs  o f what  d e v e l o p m e n t more  and more c o h e r e n t l y . T h e r e would possibility  list  152  development  career  planning  and  development.  Summary  The  purpose of t h i s  CHOICES c a r e e r  planning  study  was  computer  by i n t e r v i e w i n g 35 g r a d e 11 and critical  incident technique,  what f a c i l i t a t e d These c o l l e c t e d to  provide  hinder  counsellors possible  that  p r o g r a m was 12 s t u d e n t s  planning.  u s i n g the  r e p o r t s were e l i c i t e d their  T h i s map  to c a p i t a l i z e  the  evaluated  career  of  planning. similarity  o f what t h e p r o g r a m does t o h e l p potentially  or  enables  on b e n e f i t s and t o m i n i m i z e  detriments.  Secondly, t h i s similar  First,  i n c i d e n t s were c a t e g o r i z e d by  a map  career  or h i n d e r e d  twofold.  map  was  qualitatively  e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e SDS.  t h e two  disadvantages.  compared  O v e r a l l , i t was  i n t e r v e n t i o n s have d i f f e r i n g  to a  found  a d v a n t a g e s and  CHOICES s t r e s s e s r e a l i t y c o n s t r a i n t s ,  Page 1 specificity underlines  and e x t r i n s i c self-awareness  matching process. appropriate regarding general  and an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  I t seems t h a t CHOICES  f o r planning  options  work f e a t u r e s . The SDS  while  and s p e c i f i c  of the  i s more  decisions  t h e SDS t e n d s t o f o c u s  e x p l o r a t i o n and d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g  on  fields.  Page  154  References  Andersson,  B.,  & Nilsson,  reliability  and  S.  (1964). S t u d i e s i n the  validity  of the c r i t i c a l  t e c h n i q u e . J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d  incident  Psychology,  48,  398-403. Aranya,  N.,  Barak,  Holland's Journal Aubin,  S.  of V o c a t i o n a l  (1983). Etude travail  verification Canadien, V.  de  18,  L.  effects and  & Amernic,  differentielle dans  Colorado,  1974).  International, M.  UL,  et evolutive  de  Holland. Conseiller  guidance  vocational  s t u d y of  the  systems:  the  guidance  U n i v e r s i t y of  35,  systems  model. Northern  Dissertation Abstracts 2670A.  (1986). Computer-Assisted as d e c i s i o n  J o u r n a l of Guidance  21-32.  des  l e c o n t e x t e d'une  (1974). A comparative  (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n ,  British  of  13-20.  of 2 v o c a t i o n a l  guidance  (1981). A t e s t  B e h a v i o r , 19., 15-24.  la theorie  a traditional  Ballantine,  J.  t h e o r y i n a p o p u l a t i o n of a c c o u n t a n t s .  v a l e u r s de  Avallone,  A.,  support and  careers systems.  Counselling  SDS  Page Barker,  S.  B.  of the  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . An  SDS  f o r use  individuals. Florida  by v i s u a l l y  development  disabled  (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n ,  State  Abstracts  e v a l u a t i o n of the  155  the  U n i v e r s i t y , 1978). D i s s e r t a t i o n  I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 3_9_,  3361-A. Bellotto,  B.  (Ed.)  ( 1 9 8 5 ) . G u i d a n c e and  d i r e c t o r y of micro-computer  counselling  software.  Department o f C a r e e r / V o c a t i o n a l  Education  G u i d a n c e P u b l i c a t i o n s . In J . Hansen, c o m p u t e r s and process. and Betz,  E.  beyond  Measurement and  D e v e l o p m e n t . UL, L.  Behavior, Bingham, R.,  il,  Journal B.  Factor  behavior  (1986)  in Counselling  and of  career Vocational  (1978) C o n c u r r e n t v a l i d i t y  for college-degreed Behavior.  (1985). D i s c r i m i n a n t types  using  Questionnaire. f  and  48-52.  of V o c a t i o n a l  Behaviour  CA:  129-152.  theory  occupational  Jose,  decision-making  A Review. J o u r n a l  & W a l s h , B.  Holland's  career  Evaluation  (1977). V o c a t i o n a l  d e v e l o p m e n t , 1976:  Bolton,  i n the  San  21,  the  women.  242-250.  a n a l y s i s of  Journal  210-217.  12,  black  of  Holland's  sixteen Personality of  Vocational  Page Boyd, V.  (1976).  SDS:  Neutralizing  What d i f f e r e n c e  Vocational Brown, F.  does  Test review  Measurement and  titles  in Holland's  i t make? J o u r n a l o f  2(2),  Behavior,  (1972).  sexist  156  191-199.  of the  SDS.  E v a l u a t i o n i n Guidance.  5_,  315-319. Brusch,  M.,  & K r l e s h o k , T.  realistic  H o l l a n d t y p e s and  theoretical Vocational Buros,  0.  (1981).  adjustment  e n g i n e e r i n g majors. Behavior,  (Ed.)  Investigative  (1978).  Yearbooks. Highland  versus  in  J o u r n a l of  i i , 162-173.  The  E i g h t h Mental  Park,  N.  Measurements -  J . : Gryshon  Press,  1606-1614. Butler,  A.  M.,  & Dowsey, M.  W.  (1978).  Using a  computer  w i t h a c a r e e r s e d u c a t i o n model o f g u i d a n c e : Interactive  Careers  Guidance  Occupational Psychology. Byrne,  T.  (1980).  Holland's Cairns,  P.  Alberta:  S e l f - E s t e e m and  SDS.  (1978).  51,  Canadian  The  System. J o u r n a l o f 22-30. satisfaction  C o u n s e l l o r . 14,  with  160-162.  CHOICES e v a l u a t i o n . Edmonton,  Advanced E d u c a t i o n and  Manpower.  Page Cairo,  P.  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The v a l i d i t y  interest  of the Holland  s c a l e s of the Strong  Blank: Leisure membership  activities  as c r i t e r i a .  and  Vocational  versus  157  basic  Interest  occupational  Journal  of  Vocational  B e h a v i o r , 15_, 68-77 . Cairo,  P.  (1983). E v a l u a t i n g  computer-assisted  D. D.,  vocational theory  & Holland, interest  Psychologist. J . C.  May  Immigration Casserly,  C.  trial  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Summary e v a l u a t i o n  and I m m i g r a t i o n  (1980). E v a l u a t i o n  a field  report: and  Canada.  Employment  in  Vocational  3, 1977. O t t a w a : Employment  o f CHOICES i n a f i e l d  C.  of  Holland's  Canada.  generation  Casserly,  55-60.  and D i c t i o n a r y o f O c c u p a t i o n s .  ( 1 9 7 7 ) . CHOICES f i e l d  30-June  Applying  Journal  (1974). Ottawa: I n f o r m a t i o n C.  11(4),  353-376.  Canadian C l a s s i f i c a t i o n  Casserly,  selective  ( 1 9 7 2 ) . A merger i n  research:  f o r Strong's data.  B e h a v i o r , 2.,  of  c o u n s e l l i n g systems: A  r e v i e w . The C o u n s e l l i n g Campbell,  the e f f e c t s  setting.  presentations  setting.  first Ottawa:  Canada. of c o u n s e l l i n g  I n G. R o s s  of the world  of the  (Ed.),  seminar  on  programs  Workshop employment  counselling  ( p p . 4 9 2 - 5 1 4 ) . O t t a w a : Employment  Immigration  Canada.  and  Page Cassie,  S.,  Ragsdale,  comparative Selected systems  analysis  M.  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . A.  o f CHOICES and  S.G.I.S.;  batch  delivery  f o r computer-assisted guidance.  Toronto:  of E d u c a t i o n  R.  T.  counsellors Maturity CHOICES, B.  & Robinson,  a s p e c t s o f o n - l i n e and  Ministry Chodzinski,  R.,  158  (1983). V a l i d i t y u s i n g the  1978  edition  Inventory. Canadian  C.  concerns f o r  Columbia:  Career  C o u n s e l l o r . !§.,  (1981) a c o u n s e l l o r ' s  Richmond, B r i t i s h  of the  5-12.  resource guide.  Occupational Training  Counci1. C h r i s t e n s e n , K.,  Gelso, C ,  (1975). V a r i a t i o n s  Closs,  S.  and  S.J.  Cochran,  L.  construct  results. 12-16.  J o u r n a l of O c c u p a t i o n a l  14.,  f u t u r e developments  British  J o u r n a l of  of  Guidance  53-65.  (1987). Framing  Neimeyer  SDS  41-47.  system.  Counselling.  introduction G.  51,  W.  i n career guidance:  ( 1 9 8 6 ) . C u r r e n t and  the JIIG-CAL and  pitfalls.  with  of the  P s y c h o l o g y . 22.(1),  J . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Computers  Psychology, Closs,  satisfaction  of C o u n s e l l i n g  Promises  & Sellacek,  i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  s c o r i n g a c c u r a c y and Journal  W i l l i a m s , R.,  Career D e c i s i o n s :  to the Career G r i d . ( E d s . ) , A casebook  t h e r a p y . New  In R.  An  Neimeyer  in personal  York: S p r i n g e r .  &  Page 159 Colozzi,  E . A., & H a e h n l e n ,  a computerized  career  community c o l l e g e International Counselling,. Coglon,  F. P., ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The i m p a c t o f information  i n an i s l a n d  Journal  on a  state.  f o r t h e Advancement o f  5_, 273-282.  D. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . E x p l o r i n g  Grade:  system  The C a n a d i a n  careers  v i a computers.  E d u c a t i o n News  Magazine.  1 ( 6 ) , 17. Cooper,  J . F. (1976). Comparative  the  Vocational  career  Card  Sort  impact  on c a r e e r  o f t h e S C I I and s a l i e n c e and  e x p l o r a t i o n o f women. J o u r n a l  Psychology.  of C o u n s e l l i n g  23, 348-352.  C o s t a , P.T., McCrae, R., & H o l l a n d ,  J.C. (1984).  P e r s o n a l i t y and v o c a t i o n a l  i n t e r e s t s i n an a d u l t  sample.  P s y c h o l o g y , 69.,  Journal  of Applied  390-400. Crites,  J . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The S e l f - D i r e c t e d S e a r c h .  ( E d . ) , The e i g h t h  mental  measurements  (pp. 1 6 0 6 - 1 6 1 2 ) . H i g h l a n d P a r k ,  I n 0. B u r o s  yearbooks,  N.J.: Gryshon  Press . Cutts,  C. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . The S e l f - D i r e c t e d S e a r c h .  Measurement  UL, 117-120.  and  Evaluation  i n Guidance.  Daniels,  H., M i n e s ,  R., & G r e s s a r d , C. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . A  meta-model Personel  forevaluating  and G u i d a n c e  c o u n s e l l i n g programs.  Journal,  59, 578-583.  Page Diamond,  E.  (Ed. (1975).  fairness  i n career  W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.: Dolliver,  R.,  Issues  o f s e x b i a s and s e x  interest U.S.  & Hansen, R.  160  inventories.  Government P r i n t i n g (1977).  Review of t h e  Office. SDS.  and E v a l u a t i o n i n G u i d a n c e , I Q . ,  Measurement 120-123. Donovan, T. and  (1980).  future direction.  3_5_(5), D o t y , M.,  education School  & Betz,  N.  (1979).  Vocational  validity  Behavior  (1978).  updating  Guidance Worker.  of Holland's  tool  r  15.  C,  testing  counselling  o c c u p a t i o n . J o u r n a l of  207-216.  (1986).  51,  Intergrating  & W h i t n e y , D.  configural Psychology.  and  (1972).  p e r s o n a l i t y types  analysis. 19,  computer  and a s s e s s m e n t i n t o t h e  p r o c e s s . Measurement  of H o l l a n d ' s  creation  97-104.  and E v a l u a t i o n  i n C o u n s e l l i n g and D e v e l o p m e n t . 19. Edwards, K.,  f o r men  f o r c o u n s e l l o r s . J o u r n a l of  & Cech, E.  assisted  theory  An o n - l i n e i n t e r a c t i v e  Occupational Psychology. Eberly,  experiences  Comparison of the  women i n an e n t e r p r i s i n g  Dowsey, M.  - post  36-77.  concurrent and  Career  19-26.  Structural using  analysis  factor  J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l l i n g  136-145.  and  Page Eilbert,  L. (1953). A s t u d y of e m o t i o n a l  utilizing  the c r i t i c a l  University Engels,  D. W.,  of P i t t s b u r g h Caulum, D.,  Computers  incident  perspective.  immaturity  technique.  Bulletin.  41,  & Sampson, D. E .  in counsellor  161  e d u c a t i o n : An  199-204. (1984). ethical  C o u n s e l l o r E d u c a t i o n and S u p e r v i s i o n ,  2_4, 193-203. F i s h b u r n e , F., & W a l s h , B. of  (1976).  Concurrent  Holland's theory f o r non-college  validity  degreed  w o r k e r s . J o u r n a l o f V o c a t i o n a l B e h a v i o r , 8_, 77-84. Fitzsimmons,  G.,  validity  & M e l n y c h u k , D.  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The c o n c u r r e n t  of the Canadian O c c u p a t i o n a l  I n v e n t o r y and t h e SDS.  Interest  C a n a d i a n C o u n s e l l o r , 13.,  219-224. Flanagan,  J . ( 1 9 5 4 ) . The c r i t i c a l  Psychological Bulletin, Flanagan, our  Incidence  technique.  5 1 , 327-358.  J . (1978). A r e s e a r c h approach t o improving quality  of l i f e .  A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i s t , 33,  138-148. Fretz,  B. R.  career  (1981). E v a l u a t i n g the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of inventories.  Psychology.  J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l l i n g  23., 77-90.  Page Gelso,  C,  Collins,  ( 1 9 7 3 ) . The scoring  on  Behavior, Geoffroy,  K.  Williams,  accuracy Holland's  £,  SDS.  administration  Journal  of  W. and  Vocational  375-382. locus  of John H o l l a n d ' s  of c o n t r o l ,  8,  -  theory  International Journal  of C o u n s e l l i n g . E.  & Sedlacec,  of E n g l i s h c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s  application choices.  R.,  of s e l f  (1985). Congruence,  readings  Ginzberg,  A.,  162  An  of  f o r the  and  vocational Advancement  157-164.  ( 1 9 7 2 ) . Toward a t h e o r y  of  CHOICE: A r e s t a t e m e n t . V o c a t i o n a l  occupational Guidance  Q u a r t e r l y , 10.(3), 169-176. Goldman, L. New G o s s e , A.  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . R e s e a r c h methods f o r c o u n s e l l o r s .  Y o r k : J o h n W i l e y and  Sons,  ( 1 9 8 0 ) . S t u d e n t ' s and  Inc.  parents'  r e a c t i o n to  CHOICES. V a n c o u v e r : P o l i c y D e v e l o p m e n t , M i n i s t r y of  Education.  Gottfredson, interest  G.  ( 1 9 7 6 ) . A n o t e on  G.  252-254.  in  Evaluation  221-223.  (1978). E v a l u a t i n g  interventions. 12,  wording  measurement. Measurement and  G u i d a n c e . 8.(4), Gottfredson,  sexist  Journal  vocational  of V o c a t i o n a l  Behavior.  in  Page Gottfredson,  G.  interest  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The  i n v e n t o r i e s . The  Quarterly. Gottfredson,  31.  G.,  choices  & Holland,  predictors  and  p s y c h o l o g y , 22,  of  of  D.  of  Counselling,  1_4,  (1977). Using  of c a r e e r  decision-making  J . H.  21,  age,  sex  patterns. 121-138.  of micro-computers of Guidance  for  and  12-20. & B r e n n e r , 0.  exploration process.  on  the  Journal  (1983).  The  career  of C o l l e g e  Student  495-502.  (1984). C o n s e r v a t i v e  approach to computers Using  radicalism:  i n mental h e a l t h .  Schivarts  (Ed.),  practice:  P s y c h o t h e r a p y and  applications  a  to d e s c r i b e  Journal  G r e e h n a u s , J . , Hawkins, B.,  Personnel,  of  Counselling  B e h a v i o r . LQ_,  Implications British  Griest,  Journal  occupations  counsellors.  impact  Vocational  28-34.  Vocational  (1986).  unnormed  Guidance  (1975).  t i m e d i f f e r e n c e s i n employment  Journal G r a y , K.  J . L.  SDS.  & Daiger,  classification and  Vocational  women: A c o m p a r i s o n  from the  G.,  f a i r n e s s of  123-127.  o f men  Gottfredson,  sex  163  computers  in  mental  ( p p . 1 9 1 - 1 9 4 ) . New  An  In M.  D.  clinical health  Y o r k : Hawarth  Press.  Page Guerette,  J.  (1980). E f f e c t s of a computerized  guidance  information  s y s t e m on  career  high  students.  Dissertation Abstracts  school  International,  164  development of  senior  (University Microfilm International  8115332). Hansen, J .  (1977). Coding SCII  Holland's  vocational theory.  Evaluation Hansen, J .  75-83.  ( 1 9 8 6 ) . Computers and  beyond  process.  i n C o u n s e l l i n g and  C o u n s e l l i n g and Haring-Hidore, use  M.  D e v e l o p m e n t , 19_,  computers  females.  career Evaluation  48-52.  Evaluation  on  vocational  in  In p u r s u i t of s t u d e n t s  for career  D.  Journal  interest  J.  ( 1 9 6 8 ) . The  information.  measures f o r a d u l t  of C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y ,  12-20.  computerisation  Vocational  of  of  27(5).  478-483 . Harris,  do  139-140.  (1980). R e l i a b i l i t y  codes a c r o s s  who  guidance. Journal  D e v e l o p m e n t . 63,  & Zytowski,  Holland's  and  D e v e l o p m e n t . 19_,163-176.  (1984).  C o u n s e l l i n g and Harmon, L.,  Measurement and  Measurement and  to  i n the  (1987). C r o s s - c u l t u r a l r e s e a r c h  interests.  not  Measurement  i n G u i d a n c e . 10_,  decision-making  Hansen, J .  items a c c o r d i n g  of  vocational  Guidance Q u a r t e r l y .  17.,  Page Harris,  J.  ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The  future. Journal  computer: Guidance  tool  of  of C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y ,  165  the  21,  331-339 . Harris-Bowlsbey, decider.  J.  The  Harris-Bowlsbey, In C.  J.  (1983b).  J.  development.  and Healy,  and Healy,  VA:  the  school  American  The  computer and  career  145-148. S i n g l e case  experimental design  Psychology. Career  49,  of  and  Counselling  193-211.  Development. T o r o n t o :  Allyn  Beacon. & M o u r t o n , D.  Self-Directed evaluative  Healy,  and  c l i n i c a l p r a c t i c e . Journal  (1982).  C,  22,  perspective.  J o u r n a l Qf C o u n s e l l i n g and  (1981).  Clinical  C.  A historical  9-14.  Association.  (1984).  D e v e l o p m e n t , 6_3_,  empirical  the  P s y c h o l o g i s t , 11.(4),  (pp. 1 - 1 6 ) . A l e x a n d r i a ,  Harris-Bowlsbey,  C.  computer and  (Ed.), Microcomputers  School Counsellor  Hayes, S.  The  Counselling  Johnson  counsellor  (1983a).  (1983).  D e r i v a t i v e s of  the  Search: P o t e n t i a l c l i n i c a l &  uses. Journal  of V o c a t i o n a l  Behavior,  318-328.  C,  Scales  & M o u r t o n , D.  L.  (1984a).  & Career Maturity.  i n g u i d a n c e , 11,  20-29.  The  SDS  Measurement &  Personality Evaluation  Page Healy, c ,  & M o u r t o n , D.  abbreviated decision  ( 1 9 8 4 b ) . The  S e l f - D i r e c t e d Search  compentencies  students.  The  effects on  the  of  166  an  career  o f community c o l l e g e  Vocational  Guidance Q u a r t e r l y ,  33,  55-62. H e g i n b o t h a m , H. careers  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Computer a p p l i c a t i o n s i n  s e r v i c e of a  large c i t y .  Journal  the  of  O c c u p a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y , 51, 85-9 3. Hener, T., and  & Meir,  Journal E.  L.  career  Herr,  E.,  within  ( 1 9 8 5 ) . The  the  nursing  role  consistency job  occupation.  Behavior,  18.,  304-309.  of p r o f e s s i o n a l  in effecting  the  use  of t e c h n o l o g y  of Career  in  Development,  176-186. & Best,  P.  H e r z b e r g , F.,  role  of the  Philosophical  and  (1966).  York: John W i l e y  (1982). C o u n s e l l i n g  process  methodical  Counselling Psychologist.  and  research:  dilemnas.  1£L( 4 ) ,  of  192-195.  & Snyderman, B.  t o Work. New  and  profession. Journal  D e v e l o p m e n t , 63,  Mausuer, B.,  Motivation E.  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Computer t e c h n o l o g y  The  C o u n s e l l i n g and  C.  p r e d i c t o r s of  development. J o u r n a l  counselling:  Hill,  as  of V o c a t i o n a l  organizations  11,  (1981). Congruency,  differentation  satisfaction  Herr,  E.  7-19.  The  The Sons.  Page Himler,  M.  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . An  e v a l u a t i o n of c o m p u t e r i z e d  d e l i v e r y systems  Unpublished  m a n u s c r i p t : Department of L a b o r ,  of H o l l a n d ,  J . L.  New Holland,  a theory  Jersey: J . L.  (1973). Making  P r e n t i c e - H a l l . New  ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The  Self  Manual. P a l o  Psychologist  Press.  J . L.  associated  ( 1 9 7 6 a ) . The typology:  Hanson. J o u r n a l Holland,  J . L.  survive and  his colleagues.  G u i d a n c e , £, Holland, Palo Holland,  J . L.  career. Holland,  Preference  A  last  SDS  and  its  r e p l y to Prediger Behavior, and  raw  response  8_,  349-358.  scores to  Prediger  Evaluation  Self  Directed  in  Search.  Psychologists.  ( 1 9 7 7 b ) . U n d e r s t a n d i n g y o u r s e l f and Alto: Consulting  ( 1 9 7 8 a ) . Manual Inventory.  Psychologists  and  132-135.  ( 1 9 7 7 a ) . The  Palo  J . L.  Consulting  Measurement and  Alto: Consulting J . L.  Search:  v i r t u e s of the  of V o c a t i o n a l  test:  Cliffs,  York.  Alto:  A second  State  Vocational  Directed  (1976b). C o n s i s t e n c y  another  Citv.  of c a r e e r s . Englewood  Professional  Holland,  York  career  information  Choices:  i n New  167  Press.  Palo  Psychologists  f o r the Alto:  Vocational Consulting  your  Press.  Page Holland,  J . L.  Alto: Holland,  The O c c u p a t i o n s  Consulting Psychologists  J . L.  SDS.  J . L., & G o t t f r e d s o n , G.  Measurement  guide  items r e v i s i o n s and E v a l u a t i o n  Palo  f o r the  T o r o n t o : Guidance  of E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y  differences,  Finder.  Press.  (1979). A c o u n s e l l o r ' s  Canadian E d i t i o n ,  Faculty Holland,  (1978b).  168  Centre,  of Toronto.  (1976).  Sex  validity  and t h e  i n Guidance,  SDS.  8_( 4 ) ,  224-228 . Holland,  J . L., & N a f z i g e r ,  validity  o f t h e SDS.  Guidance, Holland,  D. H.  Measurement  the v a l i d i t y  vocational  C. L.  processing gifted  Iachan,  R.  & Nafziger,  D.  (1975).  s i g n s of  decision-making a b i l i t y . J o u r n a l of 22,  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The  411-422.  impact  on t h e S e l f - D i r e c t e d  and t a l e n t e d  Vocational  and E v a l u a t i o n i n  of t h e o r e t i c a l  Counselling Psychology, Hollinger,  on t h e  7_, 259-262.  J . L., G o t t f r e d s o n , G.,  Testing  (1976). A note  female  B e h a v i o r , 24,  of gender  schematic  Search responses of  a d o l e s c e n t s . J o u r n a l of  15-27.  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . A means o f a g r e e m e n t f o r u s e w i t h t h e  Holland  classification  Vocational  system. J o u r n a l of  b e h a v i o r . 24., 13 3-141.  Page Jarvis,  P.  (1976a). A p r o p o s a l f o r a  occupational  i n f o r m a t i o n system  employment c o u n s e l l i n g . career of Jarvis,  a n a l y s i s and  Manpower and P.  (1976b).  f u n c t i o n s and  P.  Immigration,  Jarvis,  P.  P.  (1982b).  C.  S.  American for Johnson,  Immigration  of  system  Canada.  s y s t e m and i t s  to school counselling.  School  5-12.  CHOICES t r a v e l Immigration  guidance  of C o u n s e l l i n g ,  & Sampson, J . P. t o use  D e v e l o p m e n t . 11. R.,  Canada. in  higher education. International Journal  t h e Advancement C,  82/93.  g u i d e . Ottawa:  (1983). Computer-based  counsellors  K a t z , M.  May.  CHOICES.  Employment and Johnson,  Department  ( 1 9 8 2 a ) . CHOICES c o u n s e l l o r ' s manual  O t t a w a : CSG Jarvis,  Branch,  a c c e s s p a t t e r n s - BISP/SGIS/CHOICES.  Worker, 2 2 ( 3 ) ,  Guidance  f o r c a r e e r and  A g r a p h i c comparison  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . CHOICES: The  applicability  computerized  O t t a w a : O c c u p a t i o n a l and  development  O t t a w a : Employment and Jarvis,  computer a s s i s t e d  (1985).  computers.  6_,  135-141.  Training  J o u r n a l of  Career  118-128.  & S h a t k i n , L.  Psychologist,  169  (1983). C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  guidance.  li(4),  15-31.  The  Counselling  of  Page Kimball, and  R.,  S e d l a c e k , N.,  white v o c a t i o n a l  Journal Kline,  P.  & B r o o k s , W. interests  o f Negro E d u c a t i o n ,  (1973).  Black  i n Holland's  42,  170  SDS.  1-4.  (1975). P s y c h o l o g y of V o c a t i o n a l  Guidance.  L o n d o n : B. T. B a s f o r d L t d . Krivatsy,  S. E . , & Magoon, T. M.  (1976).  effects  of three  Journal  of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology,  vocational counselling  Krumboltz, J . (1966). B e h a v i o r a l Journal Krumboltz,  Differential  goals  23,  treatments. 112-118.  for counselling.  of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology,  13,  J . , Becker-Haven, J . , & Burnett,  153-159. K.  (1979).  C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology. Annual review of Psychology. Laing,  J . , Swaney, K.,  Integrating and  D.  & Prediger,  vocational  expressed  Behavior. Laird,  556-602.  25,  choices.  D.  interest Journal  (1984). inventory  of V o c a t i o n a l  304-315.  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . CHOICES q u e s t i o n n a i r e  pilot School  p r o g r a m . Richmond, B r i t i s h  (1979). Career  the n o n - s e x i s t  SDS . Measurement 87-97.  junior  secondary  Columbia:  Richmond  Board.  L a w l e r , A. C. using  results  e x p l o r a t i o n with  Vocational  and E v a l u a t i o n  Card  women  S o r t and t h e  i n G u i d a n c e . 12. (a ) ,  Page Lecompte, C , in  Dumont, F.,  & Z i n g l e , H.  Counselling-Psychology:  (1981).  171  Research  Changing emphasis  Canadian p e r s p e c t i v e . Canadian C o u n s e l l o r ,  in a  llLd),  9-20. L o e s c h , L.  C.  (1986). Computer-assisted  reaction  t o M e i r and  Evaluation  Geiger.  assessment:  Measurement  i n C o u n s e l l i n g and  A  and  Development,.  19,  35-37. L o n g , J . P.  (1984). A d a p t a t i o n  s y s t e m f o r use  with  C o u n s e l l i n g and  information students.  systems with  of  168-171.  (1976). Comparison of  c o u n s e l l o r based  Journal  planning  micro-computers. J o u r n a l  Development. £ 2 ,  M a o l a , J . , & Kane, G. based versus  of a c a r e e r  computer  occupational  disadvantaged  vocational  of C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y ,  22,  163-165. M a r - B r e n n a n , C. career  ( 1 9 8 1 ) . The  effects  g u i d a n c e s y s t e m on  self-concept  and  college  students.  Florida  State  Abstracts  career  the  of a  development  maturity  (Doctoral  computer-based  of  of  community  dissertation,  U n i v e r s i t y , 1981). D i s s e r t a t i o n  I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 12(1),  88-A.  Page 172 Matthews, D., & Walsh, B. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . C o n c u r r e n t Holland's  theory  women. J o u r n a l Maze, M.,  of non-college  of V o c a t i o n a l  & Cummings, R.  degreed  working 12,  Behavior.  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . How t o s e l e c t  computer a s s i s t e d c a r e e r California:  v a l i d i t y of  371-379. a  guidance system.  Richmond,  EUREKA.  McGowan, A. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . V o c a t i o n a l  maturity  and a n x i e t y  among v o c a t i o n a l l y u n d e c i d e d and i n d e c i s i v e students.  Journal  of V o c a t i o n a l  B e h a v i o r . JLO.,  196-204. McKee G e l e s k o , B., & C h i a v a r o l i S c h r o e d l , Computer-assisted hearing-impaired  career  guidance  college students.  K.  (1984).  with Journal of  C o u n s e l l i n g and D e v e l o p m e n t . 6_1, 162-167. McKinlay,  B. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . S t a n d a r d s o f q u a l i t y i n s y s t e m s o f  career  information.  Journal  o f C o u n s e l l i n g and  D e v e l o p m e n t . 63., 149-152. M e l h u s , G., H e r s h e n s o n , D., & V e r m i l l i o n , M. Computer a s s i s t e d v e r s u s with  high  and low r e a d i n e s s  Vocational Michal,  Behavior,  2,  clients.  counselling Journal of  137-144.  W. L . , & Graumenz, J . C. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . An a s s e s s m e n t  of the a c c u r a c y decision 25,  traditional  (1973).  of self-assessment  making. J o u r n a l  245-253.  f o r career  of V o c a t i o n a l  Behavior.  Page M i n o r , F.  J . , M e y e r s , R.,  experimental  & S u p e r , D.  computer-based  educational  e x p l o r a t o r y system. Personnel 47.,  computer-assisted system survey; United  States  A consultant's  report  Journal,  on  career  study.  guidance  Washington:  Labor.  (1978a).  employee  theory.  Person-Environment  job s a t i s f a c t i o n :  Journal  of V o c a t i o n a l  a test  of  Behavior,  84-100. & M u c h i n s k y , P.  validation  Behavior. M u c h i n s k y , P.  M.  of  23,  1982:  Vocational  behavior  A review. Journal  In A.  E.  educational  Bergin  and  S.  of  career  Vocational  empirical analysis.  New  and L.  ( E d s . ) Handbook o f p s y c h o t h e r a p y and c h a n g e : An  &  123-178.  ( 1 9 7 1 ) . R e s e a r c h on  counselling.  with  348-354.  (1983). V o c a t i o n a l  development,  Concurrent  h e x a g o n a l model  workers. Journal  12,  Behavior.  (1978b).  of H o l l a n d ' s  occupational  M y e r s , R.  i n s t r u c t i o n and  & M u c h i n s k y , P.  Holland's  Mount, M.,  career  Guidance  (1978). F i n a l  Department of  c o n g r u e n c e and  12,  and  An  564-569.  Morgan Management Systems  Mount, M.,  (1969).  173  vocational  Garfield behavior  York:  Wiley.  Page M y e r s , R.  A.,  & Cairo,  Computer-assisted The  Counselling  Nabors, J .  (Eds.).  counselling  of  satisfaction in  (Doctoral  J . L.,  J.  (1974). A p p l y i n g  to  the  an  Behavior,  Helrus,  group c o u n s e l l i n g  5_,  &  classification  of  the on  e f f e c t s of  measures o f  self-information  group p r o c e s s  factors.  dissertation,  University  Missouri,  of  J . A.  Abstracts  m e a s u r e s of (Doctoral  of  self-information  and  1975). 36,  the  6560-A.  effects  process  dissertation, University Abstracts  self  (Doctoral  International, of  three  seeking  development group t e c h n i q u e s  1974). D i s s e r t a t i o n 4659-B.  of  (1975). A comparison  three career  McPartland,  331-345.  techniques  cognitive  S.,  b e h a v i o u r and  Nicholsen,  Abstracts  young women. J o u r n a l  (1976). A comparison  Dissertation  Holland's  dissertation,  occupational  work h i s t o r i e s o f  information  7.  41.(12).  Holland,  Vocational  ii(4),  issue).  Kansas, 1980). D i s s e r t a t i o n  International, D.,  (1983).  (special  Psychologist.  careers.  University  N e l s o n , R.  C.  (1981). V o c a t i o n a l  t h e o r y of  Nafziger,  P.  174  of  on  variables.  Missouri,  International.  35.  Page N o l a n , J . ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e SDS with  175  compared  group c o u n s e l l i n g i n promoting  information-seeking  behavior  and r e a l i s m o f  (Doctoral  dissertation,  vocational  choice.  University  of Maryland, C o l l e g e  Dissertation O ' B r i e n , W.,  Abstracts  & W a l s h , B.  Holland's  theory  w o r k i n g men.  Park,  1973).  I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 25_, 195A.  (1976). Concurrent v a l i d i t y of  f o r non-college  Journal  degreed  of Vocational  black  Behavior.  8_,  239-246. Olivier,  L.  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Outcome  counselling  research.  Psychology,  26.(3),  O'Neil,  Journal  217-226.  J . , & Magoon,  consistency Vocational  s i g n s of  and  their  T.  Behavior.  11,  166-173.  ( 1 9 7 7 ) . The p r e d i c t i v e powers  i n v e s t i g a t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y type levels  using  Behavior,  J . , Magoon,  Holland's  theoretical  t o a c a d e m i c p o t e n t i a l and a c h i e v e m e n t .  of V o c a t i o n a l  of H o l l a n d ' s  i n career  of C o u n s e l l i n g  and d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  relationship  O'Neil,  Journal  J . (1977). Holland's  consistency  O'Neil,  measurement  t h e SDS. J o u r n a l s  T., & T r a c e y ,  levels  of  10., 39-46. J . (1978). S t a t u s  i n v e s t i g a t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y types  consistency  and  seven years  C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y . 2JL,  later.  530-535.  and  of their  J o u r n a l of  Page O'Neil,  J., Price,  value,  G.,  treatment  completing  the  Psychology. O'Shea, A.,  & Tracy, effects  SDS  26,  and  and  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The sex  SCII.  stimulus  d i f f e r e n c e s when  Journal  of  Counselling  45-50.  & Harrington,  reliability  T.  176  T.  ( 1 9 8 0 ) . The  scorer  of s e l f - s c o r e d i n t e r e s t i n v e n t o r i e s .  Measurement and  Evaluation  i n G u i d a n c e , 12.( 4 ) ,  229-232. Osipow, S.  (1976). V o c a t i o n a l behavior  development Behavior, Osipow, S.  9_,  A review.  of c a r e e r  Englewood C l i f f s ,  F.  & S a b a r o u c h e , H.  type  and  occupational  P e c k u , N.  i n the  F.  testing  Advancement o f C o u n s e l l i n g , 8_, the  Holland's  International Journal  career  s c a l e f o r measuring career  students  i n Ghana: A r e l i a b i l i t y  (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n ,  1982). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s  147-156.  maturity  attitude  1049A.  Boston:  (1985). P e r s o n a l i t y  preference:  Caribbean.  (1982). Adapting  study.  (3rd  Miffin.  A.,  the  Vocational  NJ: P r e n t i c e - H a l l .  Payne, M.  for  of  development  (1909). Choosing a v o c a t i o n .  Houghton  theory  Journal  career  129-145.  (1983). T h e o r i e s  ed.). Parsons,  1975:  and  and  inventory  maturity  of  validity  Indiana U n i v e r s i t y , I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 43(4).  Page Peraino,  J . , & W i l l e r m a n , L.  correlates Holland 22, Pilato,  (1983). P e r s o n a l i t y  of o c c u p a t i o n a l  types.  Journal  status according  of V o c a t i o n a l  & M e y e r s , R.  computer-meditated  Behavior,  (1973). E f f e c t s of v o c a t i o n a l guidance  Accuracy of self-knowledge. Behavior,  2,  F. A.. & F i t z g e r a l d ,  P.,  Pound, A.  21,  i n Guidance. 12(2),  before  D.  and  of  career  training.  U n i v e r s i t y of  British  C.  Measurement  G u i d a n c e , 2 ( 3 ) , 136-138.  to  98-107.  CHOICES  ( 1 9 7 6 a ) . Do raw s c o r e s  A reply to Holland.  R.  characteristics  perceptions  and a f t e r  C o l u m b i a , V a n c o u v e r , B.  of  & Takai,  Measurement  Unpublished master's t h e s i s ,  Prediger,  D.,  of student  (1981). C o u n s e l l o r  counselling  guidance system i n  123-131.  i n f l u e n c e o f t h e SDS.  Evaluation  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The  J . L., D a i g e r ,  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The r e l a t i o n the  of V o c a t i o n a l  d e c i s i o n making. J o u r n a l  Behavior.  Holland,  P.  of a computerized  promoting career Vocational  Journal  procedures:  167-194.  effectiveness  Power,  to  268-277. G.,  Pinder,  177  d e s e r v e a D minus? and E v a l u a t i o n i n  Page Prediger,  D.  ( 1 9 7 6 b ) . The v i a b i l i t y  consistency  of  Holland's  c o n s t r u c t and raw s c o r e  personality.  Measurement  178  assessments of  and E v a l u a t i o n o f  G u i d a n c e , 1 ( 3 ) , 124-131. Prediger,  D.  (1981a). A note  validity  f o r females.  Quarterly, Prediger,  D.  research.  Vocational  D.,  Guidance Q u a r t e r l y ,  & Hanson, G.  assumptions.  Behavior, D.,  Journal  & Hanson, G.  valid  The  theory  of  A n a l y s i s of  of V o c a t i o n a l  (1976b). A t h e o r y  Behavior,  course  selection:  A computer b a s e d  counsellor  based system.  Michigan State  of  Journal  careers  of  8_, 350-366.  (1974). Computerized  Abstracts  21-36.  8_, 167-184.  Vocational G.  scores  (1976a). Holland's  encounters sex: Reply to Holland.  Price,  30,  31, 13 3-136.  a p p l i e d t o women and men:  implicit  interests:  Guidance Q u a r t e r l y ,  sex-fair? A reply to Gottfredson.  careers  Prediger,  and  f o r v o c a t i o n a l g u i d a n c e and  D. J . ( 1 9 8 2 ) . A r e raw i n t e r e s t  Vocational Prediger,  Guidance  (1981b). Mapping o c c u p a t i o n s grid  and  Vocational  3JL, 117-119.  A graphic  Prediger,  on S e l f - D i r e c t e d S e a r c h  e x p l o r a t i o n and  system with  (Doctoral  a  dissertation,  U n i v e r s i t y , (1974). D i s s e r t a t i o n  I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 35,  3038-A.  Page Pyle,  K.,  & Shipling,  computer and Guidance Pyle,  K.  R.  Where  career  Quarterly,  ( 1 9 7 6 ) . The development. 25,  Amernic,  analytic  Vocational  SDS.  J . , & Aranya,  N.  and  (1981). A  validity  and  factor  of  Psychological  (1986). C o l l e g e  Holland-Theme congruence:  Counselling  of C o u n s e l l i n g  425-437.  & Gorman, B.  subjective  computers:  141-144.  Educational  Measurement, 41, K.,  Journal  s t u d y of the c o n s t r u c t  Holland's  the  71-75.  i s the c r e a t i v i t y ?  Rachman, D.,  and  counsellor,  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . C a r e e r c o u n s e l l i n g and  D e v e l o p m e n t , 63,  Raphael,  R.  179  Effects  occupational  Psychology.  33,  of  women's self-knowledge  structure. Journal  of  143-147.  Rayman, J . , & H a r r i s - B o w l s b e y , J . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . DISCOVER: A model f o r a s y s t e m a t i c Vocational Reardon,  R.,  Guidance  Bonnell,  Self-directed CHOICES and  Reardon,  R.,  pencil SDS.  R.,  career  paper  Journal;  328-331.  program.  24.(3), 123-134.  & Huddleston,  M.  (1982).  e x p l o r a t i o n : A comparison Journal  of  Vocational  22-30.  & Kahnweiler, and  guidance  Quarterly,  t h e SDS.  Behavior, 2J1,  career  and  W.  (1980). Comparison  tactile-board  of C o u n s e l l i n g  forms  Psychology.  of  of the  2214),  of  Page Redmond, R.  (1973).  Increasing  seeking behaviors (Doctoral College  of high school  Park,  information  students.  dissertation, University  International, Rhodes, C.  vocational  180  (1972). D i s s e r t a t i o n  of Maryland, Abstracts  3_i, 2311A-2312A.  ( 1 9 7 3 ) . An e v a l u a t i o n  o f t h e SDS and t h e  effect  o f g r o u p o r i n d e p e n d e n t use i n f a c i l i t a t i n g  career  development of secondary s c h o o l  (Doctoral 19 7 3 ) .  d i s s e r t a t i o n , West V i r g i n i a  Dissertation  Abstracts  students. University,  International,  34,  1628-A. Roberts,  C,  & W i t h e r s p o o n , J . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The  Leicestershire aid: 51,  careers  CASCAID. J o u r n a l  advisory  service  of Occupational  computer  Psychology.  69-77.  R o b i n s o n , C.  (1982). A s t u d y of C r i t e s Three  system of d i a g n o s i s .  (Doctoral  Virginia  I n s t i t u t e and  Polytechnic  University,  Dissteration,  1981). D i s s e r t a t i o n  International,  Dimensional  State  Abstracts  42., 4304-A  Rosch, E. (1978). P r i n c i p l e s of c a t e g o r i z a t i o n . E.  R o s c h and B. B. L l o y d  categorization  (Eds.),  Cognition  (pp.27-48), H i l l s d a l e ,  NJ  In and  : Erlbaum.  Page R o s e , R.  181  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The use o f c o n d i t i o n a l p r o b a b i l i t i e s i n  applications Vocational  of Holland's  Behavior.  Rounds, J . , D a v i s o n , M.,  25.  theory.  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The f i t  occupational  Holland's  hexagonal model. J o u r n a l  Behavior.  15,  Salomone, P.,  Journal  theory  of  Vocational  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f  to non-professional  of V o c a t i o n a l  Sampson, J . ( 1 9 8 3 ) . An applications  themes and  303-315.  & S l a n e y , R.  Holland's  B e h a v i o r , 12,  workers. 63-74.  i n t e g r a t e d approach  t o computer  i n c o u n s e l l i n g psychology.  Psychologist,  of  284-289.  & D a v i s R.  between SCII g e n e r a l  Journal  Counselling  H ( 4 ) , 65-74.  Sampson, J . ( 1 9 8 6 a ) . Computer t e c h n o l o g y and c o u n s e l l i n g psychology: Regression Counselling Sampson, J . P. and  Psychologist,  14,  t h e m a c h i n e ? The 567-583.  ( 1 9 8 6 b ) . Computer a p p l i c a t i o n s i n t e s t i n g  a s s e s s m e n t : An o v e r v i e w . Measurement and  Evaluation  in Counselling  Sampson, J . , & P y l e , with  toward  K.  and D e v e l o p m e n t , 12,  (1983). E t h i c a l  t h e use o f c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d  testing,  issues  Guidance J o u r n a l ,  61,  283-287.  involved  counselling,  and g u i d a n c e s y s t e m s . P e r s o n n e l  5.  and  Page Sampson, J . , & S t r i p l i n g , counsellor career  Schaefer,  a  computer-assisted  guidance system. V o c a t i o n a l 22,  Guidance  230-238.  (1977). Using  occupational 12,  (1979). S t r a t e g i e s f o r  i n t e r v e n t i o n with  Quarterly, S a n k e y , G.  R.  182  a computer t o a s s i s t  e x p l o r a t i o n . School  in  Guidance  Worker,  5-13. B.  (1976). H o l l a n d ' s  SDS:  is i t s effectiveness  contingent  upon s e l e c t e d v a r i a b l e s ? J o u r n a l  Vocational  Behavior,  Schellenberg,  A. K.  of  8_, 113-123.  (1981). F i e l d - t e s t  e v a l u a t i o n of  CHOICES. V a n c o u v e r , B. C.: O c c u p a t i o n a l  Training  Counci1. Schenk, G.,  Murphy, P.,  Computerized college  information  and G u i d a n c e J o u r n a l . A n d i a p p a n , P.,  Reconsidering  (1980). s y s t e m s on t h e  Counselling  Psychology,  58,  for  (1986).  Holland's  hypothesis. 33.  approach.  516-520.  & N e l s o n , M.  the support  congruence-achievement  S e l i g m a n , R.  R.  campus: A l o w - c o s t - d o - i t - y o u r s e l f  Personnel S c h w a r t z , R.,  career  & Shelton,  Journal  of  425-428.  ( 1 9 7 4 ) . R e v i e w o f t h e SDS. Measurement and  Evaluation  i n G u i d a n c e . 7.(2),  138-140.  r S h a r f , R.  S.  Page  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The  effect  of  information  on a C o m p u t e r i z e d  Counselling  S y s t e m . The  Quarterly. Sheeny, G. Sloan,  B.  33.  Vocational  Vocational  Guidance  130-137.  ( 1 9 8 0 ) . An e v a l u a t i o n  o f CHOICES. Richmond,  Occupational Training  Smart, J . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . D i s t i n c t i v e Holland  personality  Behavior. M  occupational  ( 1 9 7 6 ) . P a s s a g e s . T o r o n t o : Bantam B o o k s .  B. C.:  Smith,  183  Council.  career  orientations  types. Journal  of  of  Vocational  8_, 515-519.  (1978). Computer-produced  reports. Journal  vocational  guidance  of O c c u p a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y ,  51,  109-115. Spencer,  H.  (1979). A comparison  a direction Education, Spokane, A.,  for B r i t i s h S c i e n c e and  & Walsh, B.  o f CHOICES and  Columbia. Technology,  Stahl,  L.  of V o c a t i o n a l  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . K i d s and  Canadian  of  Victoria,  B  (1978). O c c u p a t i o n a l l e v e l  H o l l a n d ' s t h e o r y f o r employed Journal  Ministry  SGIS-  Vocational  men  and  B e h a v i o r . 12, careers  i n the  Association  C. and  women.  145-154. eighties.  Journal,  19_(4),  35-38. Stedham, S.  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The  advantages  and  o f CHOICES. U n p u b l i s h e d m a s t e r ' s of B. C ,  Vancouver,  B.  C.  disadvantages thesis,  University  Page 184 Sugarman, L. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . C o u n s e l l i n g Introduction Guidance Super,  and C o u n s e l l i n g , .  Harper  British  Journal of  14, 1-11.  Columbia  Computer-assisted  New Y o r k :  Teachers' College  retrieval  t o c o u n s e l l i n g and t o c a r e e r  f r o m t h e U.S.A. J o u r n a l o f  Occupational  Psychology,  D. E . , & H a l l ,  W. P o r t e r Alto: Takai,  (Eds.),  Annual  Exploration Quarterly, Talbot,  Annual  development:  I n M. R. R o s e n z w e r g & L . Review o f P s y c h o l o g y .  Palo  Reviews.  R. T., & H o l l a n d ,  Vocational  51. 19-28.  D. T. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . C a r e e r  E x p l o r a t i o n and p l a n n i n g .  through  development:  Some l e s s o n s  Super,  Press,  University.  D. E . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . From i n f o r m a t i o n  matching  New  and Row.  D. E . ( E d . ) ( 1 9 7 0 ) .  counselling.  Super,  computers:  D. E . ( 1 9 5 7 ) . The p s y c h o l o g y o f c a r e e r s .  York: Super,  and o v e r v i e w .  and  Card  J . L. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . C o m p a r i s o n  Sort,  of the  t h e SDS and t h e V o c a t i o n a l  and I n s i g h t K i t . V o c a t i o n a l  Guidance  27, 312-319.  D., & B i r k , J . ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Does t h e V o c a t i o n a l  E x p l o r a t i o n and I n s i g h t K i t e q u a l t h e sum o f i t s p a r t s ? : A comparison Psychology.  26(4),  study. Journal  359-362.  of C o u n s e l l i n g  Page Taylor,  L.  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The K e l s t e r t o n C o l l e g e  career  185  computer-aided  and v o c a t i o n a l g u i d a n c e s y s t e m . J o u r n a l o f  Occupational T i e d e m a n , D. V.  Psychology,. 51, 79-8 3. (1983). F l e x i b l e  g r o w i n g . The C o u n s e l l i n g  filing,  Psychologist,  33-47. T i n s l e y , H.,  & H e e s a c k e r , M.  Vocational  and c a r e e r  behavior  A review. Journal  c o m p u t e r s and 11(4),  (1984).  development,  of V o c a t i o n a l  Behavior,  1983:  25,  139-140 . Tittle,  C. K.,  interest  & Zytowski, measurement:  W a s h i n g t o n , D. C : Tolbert,  E . L.  D.  (Eds.)  (1978). S e x - f a i r  R e s e a r c h and i m p l i c a t i o n .  National  Institute  (1980). C o u n s e l l i n g  L.  ( 1 9 6 9 ) . The work  Counsellor. P.,  Inc.  w i t h i n t h e CHOICES s y s t e m . 12,  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . An a n a l y s i s o f t h e  d i s c r i m i n a t o r y power business  majors  Measurement  Canadian  157-162.  & Hartman, B.  175-182.  York:  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Some v o c a t i o n a l c o u n s e l l i n g  underpinnings  Utz,  Company.  o f t h e c o u n s e l l o r New  Appleton-Century-Crofts, T u r g e o n , P.  Education.  i n career  d e v e l o p m e n t . B o s t o n : Houghton M i f f l i n Tyler,  of  of Holland's  i n three  types f o r  concentration  and E v a l u a t i o n  i n Guidance.  areas. 11,  Page vanzoost,  j .  twelve  (1982).  students  decision.  Stability  Wolfville,  G . S.  Behavior.  J . , Schnitzen,  21,  personality  stability  of c h o i c e .  Behavior.  9_,  New Y o r k : Wallis,  D.  Prager  (1978).  in vocational  Walsh,  W. B .  Behavior. Walsh,  interest.  Journal  theory: of  288-298. J.  (1976).  c o n s t r u c t s as p r e d i c t o r s J o u r n a l of  of  Vocational  The d i l e m n a  guidance.  51.  and t h e  and  computer.  Journal  of  for  research  Occupational  7-18. Vocational  1978:  15,  in educational  Publishers.  A review.  behavior Journal  and c a r e e r of  Vocational  119-154.  B . , Hildebrand,  (1983).  Holland's  working  black  vocational  Holland's  Some p r e s s i n g p r o b l e m s  (1979).  development  Acadia  (1982).  Use o f computer  guidance.  Psychology.  thesis.  career  77-85.  M (1984).  vocational  grade  made a  J . , & Carbonair,  Holland's  to  N. S .  of a v o c a t i o n a l  Vocational  Wagman,  Q£ C H O I C E S  who have a l r e a d y  P. E . , & S h a f f e r ,  Villwock,  value  Unpublished master's  University, Varca,  The  186  J . , Ward,  C ,  & Mathews,  D.,  t h e o r y and n o n - c o l l e g e - d e g r e e d  and w h i t e women.  Behavior.  22,  Journal  182-190.  of  Page 187 Walsh, W. B., Bingham, (1979).  R., H o r t o n ,  H o l l a n d ' s t h e o r y and c o l l e g e - d e g r e e d  w o r k i n g b l a c k and w h i t e Vocational  Behavior,  women. J o u r n a l o f  15, 217-223.  W a l z , G., & B l e u e r , J . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . career ii,  J . , & Spokane, A.  P u t t i n g the byte  development. J o u r n a l of Career  Development,  187-198.  Ward, C ,  & Walsh, B. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  Holland's  Concurrent  v a l i d i t y of  theory f o r non-college-degreed  women. J o u r n a l o f V o c a t i o n a l B e h a v i o r , Warren, G., W i n e r , J . , & D a i l e y , K. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . Holland's  theory to the later  Vocational  Behavior,  W a t t s , A. G. ( 1 9 7 8 ) .  Extending  i n careers  guidance  Psychology,  29-40.  career  guidance:  Counselling L. (1981). of  18, 356-361.  18., 104-114.  U s i n g computers  W a t t s , A., & B a l l a n t i n e ,  West,  black  years. Journal of  in schools. Journal of Occupational 51,  into  Calgary  Wiggington,  the B r i t i s h  Computers i n  e x p e r i e n c e . The  Psychologist, 11(4), Alberta  typology to c l i e n t s .  49-59.  CHOICES e v a l u a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y  (Unpublished  J . H. ( 1 9 8 3 ) .  Behavior,  M. ( 1 9 8 3 ) .  manuscript).  The a p p l i c a b i l i t y  of Holland's  J o u r n a l of V o c a t i o n a l  23, 286-293.  Page Williamson,  E.,  & Bordin,  F.  S.  of v o c a t i o n a l e d u c a t i o n a l o f m e t h o d o l o g y and  ( 1 9 4 1 ) . The  Wilson, for  D.  evaluation  counselling: A  and  5-24.  ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Want t o know what c a r e e r  you? J u s t ask  critique  experiments. Educational  P s y c h o l o g i c a l M e a s u r e m e n t s , J_,  188  CHOICES. O n t a r i o  may  be  right  Education,  11(5)  10-12. Winer, J . C , Using  Wilson,  the  school  D.  remedial  reading  The  W o o l s e y , L. An  K  computer-based  Worthen, B.,  critical  qualitative  Canadian J o u r n a l  method o f  of C o u n s e l l i n g ,  & Sanders, J .  (1973).  California:  Wadworth P u b l i s h i n g  practice.  (1981). B r i t i s h Columbia  Ministry  of  Educational  paper. V i c t o r i a , Education.  technique:  research.  20,  242-253.  Educational  T h e o r y and  Discussion  of  career  incident  evaluation:  W r i g h t , A.  Vocational  135-144.  ( 1 9 8 6 ) . The  innovative  high  educational  guidance systems. B r i t i s h Journal  technology, 1£,  (1983).  130-135.  ( 1 9 8 5 ) . An  to designing  A.  - form E w i t h  students.  32.,  & Wisudhua, A.  approach  & P i e r c e , R.  S e l f - D i r e c t e d Search  Guidance Q u a r t e r l y . W o o l e r , S.,  0.,  Belmont, Company.  has  British  a  choice: Columbia:  Page 189 Z e n e r , T. B., & S c h n u e l l e , SDS on h i g h  school  L. (1976). E f f e c t s  students.  Journal  of the  of C o u n s e l l i n g  P s y c h o l o g y . 23, 353-359. Zytowski,  D. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . V o c a t i o n a l  development, Behavior, Zytowski,  of Vocational  13, 141-163.  occupational  479-481.  and c a r e e r  1977: A r e v i e w . J o u r n a l  D. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . C o m p a r i s o n  knowing.  behavior  o f Roe's and  classifications:  journal  of  Diverse  Counselling  Holland's  ways o f  Psychology,  22,  Page 190 Appendix A  COMPUTER-BASED GUIDANCE SYSTEMS  1.  Computer-Assisted  Career  E x p l o r a t i o n System  2.  E d u c a t i o n a l and C a r e e r  3.  Computerized V o c a t i o n a l Information  4.  Oregon C a r e e r  5.  System of I n t e r a c t i v e  E x p l o r a t i o n System  Information  (CACE).  (ECES)  System  (CVIS)  System (CIS)  G u i d a n c e and I n f o r m a t i o n  (SIGI) 6.  Information  System f o r V o c a t i o n a l D e c i s i o n  7.  Guidance Information  8.  Computer-Based  9.  Computer-Assisted  (ISVD)  System ((GIS)  Career  Development  Career  S y s t e m (DISCOVER)  Guidance Program  (CVIS  technology) 10. W i s c o n s i n 11. M i c h i g a n  Occupational Occupational  Information Information  12. S t u d e n t G u i d a n c e I n f o r m a t i o n 13. C o m p u t e r i z e d C a r e e r 14. E d u c a t i o n 15. Alabama  and C a r e e r  Occupational  16. Oregon O c c u p a t i o n a l  System  S y s t e m (MOIS)  Services  Information  (SGIS)  System  (CCIS)  E x p l o r a t i o n systems Information Information  (WOIS)  System  (ECES 111) (AOIS)  Accessing  System  (OIAS) 17. V o c a t i o n a l I n f o r m a t i o n (VICS)  t h r o u g h Computer  Systems  Page  18. V o c a t i o n a l  Information  Service  19. Computer A s s i s t e d C a r e e r 20. Automated (Guerette,  Client 1980;  Counselling  Information Jarvis,  for Alberta  System  1976)  System (ACIS)  191  (VISA) (CAGCS)  Page 192 Appendix B  ROUTES TO  1.  INTEREST: P e o p l e often, share This  INFORMATION  who work i n t h e same  basically  t h e same t y p e s  occupation of  interest.  r o u t e makes i t p o s s i b l e f o r c l i e n t s  their  interests  t o those  typical  t o compare  of workers  i n each  occupation. 2.  APTITUDES: E a c h o c c u p a t i o n abilities  of a p t i t u d e s . Using  compare s e v e r a l o f t h e i r typical 3.  r e q u i r e s a unique this  route,  abilities  with  those  The temperament  factors  used i n  CHOICES a r e r e a l l y d e s c r i p t i o n s o f w i d e l y  4.  o f work s i t u a t i o n s .  clients  c a n s e e how t h e i r  various  occupations.  By u s i n g t h i s  EDUCATION LEVEL: T h i s r o u t e  provides level  education required f o r entrance ENVIRONMENTAL  people  would c o n s i d e r u n p l e a s a n t .  clients  information  an o c c u p a t i o n .  CONDITIONS: Many o c c u p a t i o n s  t o work under p h y s i c a l  to identify  them f o r  of formal  into  people  different  route,  preferences s u i t  a b o u t t h e minimum a c c e p t a b l e  5.  clients  o f e a c h CHOICES o c c u p a t i o n .  TEMPERAMENTS:  types  s e t of  require  c o n d i t i o n s t h a t some  occupations  This route  that suit  allows  their  Page 193 needs 6.  in this  respect.  FUTURE OUTLOOK: The r e q u i r e m e n t occupations pressing the  i s declining  need. C l i e n t s  supply/demand  while  f o r workers others  use t h i s  situations  route  i n some  there  isa  to discover  i n a n y o f t h e CHOICES  occupations. 7.  EARNINGS: F o r some p e o p l e , expect  t o earn  route allows earnings 8.  t h e amount o f money  i s an important  clients  consideration. This  t o d i s c o v e r the average y e a r l y  i n e a c h CHOICES  occupation.  HOURS OF WORK/TRAVEL: C l i e n t s determine  they  t h e work s c h e d u l e  use t h i s  route to  characteristic  o f an  occupation. 9.  PHYSICAL NEEDS: The l e v e l s  of p h y s i c a l  g r e a t l y among o c c u p a t i o n s .  This route allows  to  identify  use 10.  i n an o c c u p a t i o n .  unwilling physical  that 11.  clients  how much s t r e n g t h t h e y a r e p r e p a r e d t o  PHYSICAL A C T I V I T I E S : Some p e o p l e  are  exertion vary  or unable activities.  provided  with  to perform  are either  some t y p e s o f  Through t h i s  route,  i n f o r m a t i o n about those  clients activities  f o r m a r e g u l a r p a r t o f t h e work.  INDOOR/OUTDOOR clients  CONSIDERATIONS: T h i s r o u t e  t o s e e how o c c u p a t i o n s  preference  f o r working  inside,  enables  satisfy  their  outside  or both.  Page 194 OCCUPATIONAL F I E L D S : A l l t h e o c c u p a t i o n s have been g r o u p e d i n 22 g e n e r a l If  c l i e n t s have c l e a r  which they a r e best should  be  useful.  i n CHOICES  occupational  fields.  ideas about the f i e l d s f o r  (or l e a s t )  suited,  this  route  Page 195 Appendix C  ROUTES  A.  TOPICS ALL FOUR ROUTES HAVE compare,  B.  specific,  related)  1.  Interests  5.  Future  2.  Aptitudes  6.  Earnings  3.  Temperaments  7.  Physical  4 .  Education  8.  Inside/outside  level  TOPICS FOR EXPLORE, 9.  11.  Environmental  Physical  outlook  demands  S P E C I F I C , COMPARE  conditions  C.  (Explore,  10. Hours o f work/ travel  activities  TOPICS FOR S P E C I F I C AND COMPARE 12.  Training  required  13.  Summary o f work  14.  Similar  occupations  TOPICS FOR 12.  Occupational  TOPICS FOR 9.  EXPLORE fields  RELATED  Occupational  fields  Page 197 Appendix D  CONSENT FORM  This  research project  C o c h r a n and Chuck P r o v o s t Columbia the  to find  Search  m i g h t be u s e d  more t o t a k e against  from  help  by D r . L a r r y  the U n i v e r s i t y  o u t more s p e c i f i c a l l y  Self-Directed  results  was d e s i g n e d  of B r i t i s h  how CHOICES and  i n c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . The  by c o u n s e l l o r s t o p r e p a r e  students  a d v a n t a g e o f b e n e f i t s and t o s a f e g u a r d  detriments. In  this  involvement benefitted  study,  you w i l l  be a s k e d  how  your  i n CHOICES o r i n The S e l f - D i r e c t e d you i n your  Search  c a r e e r p l a n n i n g . You may  from  t h e s t u d y a t any time  also  r e f u s e t o answer a n y q u e s t i o n . The i n t e r v i e w w i l l  be  tape  will  recorded  summary o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e s  be  erased.  with  your  tape  comments and t o e x t r a c t a y o u d e s c r i b e . When  A l l i n f o r m a t i o n you p r o v i d e w i l l and w i l l  purposes.  be u s e d  Final  results  of t h i s  will  be t r e a t e d  anonymously f o r  Refusing w i l l ,  s c h o o l s t a n d i n g or access  services.  The  o f i n f o r m a t i o n have been made, t h e t a p e  confidence  research  p r e j u d i c e . You may  u n l e s s you p r e f e r o t h e r w i s e .  a l l o w us t o s t u d y y o u r  extractions  without  withdraw  i n no way, j e o p a r d i z e  to school counselling study w i l l  be made  Page available benefit  to the  from the  c o u n s e l l o r s a t McNair  to enable  b e l o w and  them t o  study.  Your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d . sign  198  check  the  appropriate  line.  I consent I do  not  (parent's  (student's  consent  signature)  signature)  Thank  Please you.  Page Appendix  E  CATEGORIES CHOICES  (Facilitative  1.  Considers  educational  2.  Expands g e n e r a l  3.  Expands j o b o p t i o n s  4.  Narrows  5.  Stimulates  categories)  requirements  job options in a specific  field  focus c o n s i d e r a t i o n of e x t r i n s i c  work  features 6.  Answers s p e c i f i c  questions  7.  Judges f u t u r e of jobs  8.  Provides  9.  Clarifies  10.  Clarifies capabilities  11.  Matches i n t e r e s t s  12.  Confirmation  13.  D i s c o n f i r m a t i o n of choice  references  for future  planning  interests and a p t i t u d e s  t o jobs  of choice  199  Page 200 CHOICES  (Hindering  categories)  1.  Lack of i n f o r m a t i o n  2.  Fails  3.  Useless  4.  Unreliable occupational  5.  P u z z l i n g and i n a p p r o p r i a t e j o b o p t i o n s  6.  Questionable  basis  7.  Needed more  options  8.  Rushed on t e r m i n a l  9.  Machine  to confirm a prior  choice  information  malfunction  Information  f o r narrowing  jobs  Page SDS  ( F a c i l i t a t i v e categories)  1.  Considers  Educational  2.  Expands  3.  Expands j o b o p t i o n s  4.  Narrows  5.  Guides  6.  Confirms  or c l a r i f i e s  7.  Confirms  or d i s c o v e r s c a p a b i l i t i e s  job  requirements  options in a specific  field  focus information  search likes  or  dislikes or  incapabilities 8.  Stimulates  9.  Understands oneself  10.  Find  11.  Matches c a p a b i l i t i e s  12.  Matches  interest  to  13.  Matches  interest  and  14.  C o n f i r m s or  out  deliberation  where t o  over  time  improve to  jobs  jobs  justifies  capabilities choice  to  jobs  201  Page SDS  (Hindering  or m i s l e a d i n g  categories)  1.  Lack  occupational  2.  Misidentification/misdirection  3.  Irrelevance  4.  Unreliability  5.  Falls  6.  Need e x p a n s i o n o f  7.  No new  o f some  information of  interests  items  of s e l f - e s t i m a t e s  to provide  a specific  information  options  direction  202  Page 203 Appendix F TYPES OF  CATEGORIES  EACH STUDENT EXPRESSED  Student  Sex -Grade- Age  - CHOICES  Facilitative  Categories  1  M - 12 - 17  2-2-3-5-6-  2  F - 12 - 17  3-5-6-  3  F - 12 - 17  4-  4  F - 12 - 17  1-2  5  F - 11 - 16  -2  6  F - 11 - 18  1-1-3-3-4-5-5-6-7-7-7-9  7  F - 12 - 17  1-  8  F - 12 - 16  2-2-  5-5-7  9  F - 12 - 17  3-4-  8-9  10  F - 12 - 17  2-  11  F - 11 - 16  1-2-3  12  F - 12 - 17  3-4-4  13  F - 11 - 16  1 - 5 - 8  14  F - 11 - 16  1-1-1-1  15  F - 12 - 17  2-2-3-4-5-6-8-9  16  F - 11 - 16  3-5-5-9-9-13-13  17  F - 12 - 17  2-2-3-  18  F - 11 - 16  2 5-5-5-6-8-10-  19  M - 12 - 17  1-1-1-3-3-3-5-6-7-8-11-  20  F - 12 - 17  1-1-1-2- *5_-5-5-  -13 9  7- *9_-10-12 5-7-8-  12  5-7-8  6-7-  12-  * i l 11  5-5- *2-8-9-12-13 8-9-9-12-12  -6  7-8 *H-11-  12  Page 21  F  22  F - 11  23  F - 12 - 17  24  F - 12  25  F - 12 - 17  1-3-3-5-  26  F - 12 - 17  1_3_  *£_5_ _  27  M - 11  - 16  1-1-  *3_-3-5-5-5-7  28  F - 11  - 16  2-4-4-5  29  F - 11  - 16  4-5-6  -9  30  F - 11  - 16  2-2-4  7-8-9-9-10-10  31  F - 12 - 17  2  32  F - 12 - 19  1- *2 -4-5-7  33  F - 11  - 16  2-3  34  M - 11  - 16  2-2- 4- 6  35  F  16  1-2- 4- 6  —  11  11  —  16  204  1-2-3-3-4-5- * £ - 7 - 7 - *U1-  - 17  *l-2  -5-6-8- 13  3-4-5-5-6-8  - 17  1-3-6  -12 *8_-9 6  -8  7  _  1 2  -12  5-5-6  Student  Sex-Grade-Age  H i n d e r i n g C a t e g o r i e s ** O t h e r * *  1  M - 12 - 17  4-5-6  2-4  2  F  - 12 - 17  *8_  2  3  F  - 12 - 17  5-7  3-4  4  F - 12 - 17  5  F  - 11  - 16  6- *9  6  F - 11  - 18  8  2-  6- * 1  4  Page 205 7  F  12  17  8  F  12  16  *1  9  F  12  17  2-4- 6-6  10  F  12  17  1- 2  11  F  11  16  2- 3  12  F  12  17  13  F  11  16  1-2-2-6-7  14  F  11  16  *2_  15  F  12  17  4  16  F  11  16  2-  17  F  12  17  6  4-4-5  18  F  11  16  2-5  1 -7  19  M  12  17  7  6  20  F  12  17  1-1  21  F  11  16  22  F  11  17  2-2-3-4  23  F  12  17  1-  24  F  12  17  1- 1-  25  F  12  17  *6_  1- 6-7  26  F  12  17  2- 4  1-3-3  27  M  11  16  1- 1-2-2  28  F  11  16  2- 2  1-4-5  29  F  11  16  8  1-  30  F  11  16  5  1-1-1  31  F  12  17  1-2  7  1-  *1  4-5 5  2 1-5-6  5-  -6-  4- *5_ 1-1 -6 -8  4 1-1-2  *2  2  4  Page 206 32  F  - 12 - 19  33  F  - 11 - 16  34  M - 11 - 16  * i  35  F  - 11 - 16  2  *  1- *5.  3- 6 -4  E for  the  8 1-3-3  Prototype  ** See A p p e n d i x  *8_  categories  Page 207 Appendix G TYPE OF STUDENT WHO IN EACH CATEGORY  Categpry  1.  ft  Qf  PARTICIPATED (CHOICES)  incidents  # of  students  Considers educational requirements  2. Expands job  24  16 (46%)  25  19 ( 5 4 % )  23  17 ( 4 9 % )  16  14 (43%)  general  options  3. Expands j o b o p t i o n s in a specific  field  4. Narrows f o c u s  5. S t i m u l a t e s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of  extrinsic  work  features 6. Answers  35  24 (69%)  17  17 (49%)  16  14 (43%)  specific  questions 7. J u d g e s f u t u r e o f jobs 8. P r o v i d e s future  reference f o r  planning  16  16 ( 4 6 % )  14  11 (31%)  9. C l a r i f i e s  interest  10. C l a r i f i e s  capabilities  Page and  aptitudes  11. M a t c h e s  6  interests  aptitudes  and  to jobs  12. C o n f i r m a t i o n  4 (11%)  7  5 (14%)  of  choice 13. D i s c o n f i r m a t i o n  13  11  (31%)  6  6  (17%)  of  choice  Category  Sex-Grade-Aae  # of Students  More 1  than  incident  Considers  F —  11 -  16  5  educational  F  -  11 -  17  1  requirements  F  - 11 - 18  1  #6 had 2  F  -  12 -  17  6  #20  had 3  F  -  12 -  19  1  11 -  16  1  #27  had 2  12 -  17  1  11 -  16  8  #30  had 2  11 -  17  1  12 -  16  1  # 8 had 2  12 -  17  6  #15,  M M Expands job  general  options  F F F  -  F  F M  -  12 -  19  1  11 -  16  1  #14  had 4  #17  had  2  #34  had 2  208  Page  3. E x p a n d s j o b options  in a  specific  field  M - 12 -  17  1  #1 had 2  F - 11 -  16  4  #21  F - 11 -  18  1  #6 had 2  F - 12 -  17  9  #25  had 2  M - 11 -  16  1  #27  had 2  2  #19  had 3  #28  had 2  #12  had 2  #18  had 3  #16  had 2  12 -• 17  M 4.  Narrows  focus  F - 11 -  16  6  F - 11 -  18  1  F - 12 -  17  6  F - 12 -  19  1  - 11 - 16  1  M 5.  F - 11 -  Stimulates  16  8  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of extrinsic features  work  F  - 11 - 17  1  F - 11 -  18  1  #6 had 2  F - 12 -  16  1  #8 had 2  F  17  9  #20  12 -  #10,  F - 12 -  19  1  M - 11 -  16  1  M - 12-- 17 6. Answers  specific F  questions  had 2  - 11 - 16  2 5  F - 11 -  17  1  F —  18  1  11 -  had 3 #31,  #23  had 2  #27  had 3  209  Page F —  12 —  17  7  M  - 11 - 16  1  M  - 12 - 17  2  7. J u d g e s f u t u r e o f F  - 11 - 16  3  #21  jobs  F  - 11 - 18  1  #6 had 2  F  - 12 - 16  1  F  -  12 - 17  6  F  - 12 - 19  1  M - 11 - 16  1  M  - 17 - 17  1  F  - 11 - 16  6  reference for  F  - 11 - 17  1  future  F  - 11 - 18  1  F  - 12 - 17  7  - 17  1  - 11 - 16  4  8.  Provides  planning  M - 12 9.  Clarifies  F  interest  - 11 - 18  1  F - 12 - 17  6  F  - 11 - 16  3  F  - 12 - 17  1  F  10.Clarifies capabilities and  to  #16  #30  had 2  #30  had 2  #18  had 3  aptitudes  11.Matches i n t e r e s t s and  #11,  had 2  aptitudes jobs  F  - 11 - 16  2  F  - 12 - 16  1  F  - 12 - 17  1  210  Page 211  12. C o n f i r m a t i o n o f choice  13. D i s c o n f i r m a t i o n of  choice  CHOICES  M - 12 - 17  1  - 16  4  #11 had 2  F - 12 - 17  6  #10 had 2  M - 12 -  17  1  F - 11  - 16  1  F  -  17  1  F - 12 -  17  2  M - 12 -  17  1  F - 11  - 11  #16 had 2  Hindering # of i n c i d e n t s  Category  # of  students  1. Lack o f i n f o r m a t i o n  11  8 (23%)  2. U s e l e s s  17  13 (37%)  information  3. U n r e l i a b l e o c c u p a t i o n a l information 4. F a i l s  3  to confirm a  3 ( 9%)  prior  choice  7  6 (17%)  6  6 (17%)  5. P u z z l i n g and inappropriate job options 6. Q u e s t i o n a b l e narrowing  basis for  jobs  7. Needs more o p t i o n s  9  8 (23%)  6  6 (17%)  Page  212  8. Rushed on t e r m i n a l  4  4 (11%)  9. M a c h i n e m a l f u n c t i o n  1  1 ( 3%)  CHOICES  Hindering  Category  Sex-Grade-Age  1. L a c k o f information  Useless  More  students  l  F  - 11 -  16  1  F  - 12 -  16  1  F  - 12 -  17  4  F  2.  # of  - 12 - 19  had 2  #27  F - 11 -  16  7  #13,  1  F  - 12 -  17  4  M - 11 -  16  1  F  - 11 -  16  1  occupational  F  - 11 -  17  1  information  F  - 12 -  17  1  to confirm F  - 11 -  17  1  - 12 -  17  3  M - 11 -  16  1  M - 12 -  17  1  F  16  3  5. P u z z l i n g and  2  1  17  choice  F  - 11 -  #21  had  16  - 11 -  a prior  #20,  M - 11 -  F  4. F a i l s  incident  1  information  3. U n r e l i a b l e  than  #28  had  2  #22  had 2  #27  had 2  #34  had 2  Page  6.  inappropr iate  F  - 12 -  17  1  job  F  - 12 -  19  1  M - 12 -  17  1  F  - 11 -  16  2  F  - 12 -  17  5  M - 12 -  17  1  F  - 11 -  16  2  F  - 12 -  16  1  F  - 12 -  17  2  M - 12 -  17  1  F  - 11 -  16  1  F  - 11 -  18  1  F  - 11 -  17  1  F  - 12 -  17  1  F  - 11 -  16  1  options  Questionable basis for narrowing  7. Needs  jobs  more  options  8. Rushed  on  terminal  9.  Machine malfunction  213  #9 had 2  Page  214  Appendix H TYPES OF  CATEGORIES  EACH STUDENT EXPRESSED  Student  sex-•Grade -Age 12 - 19  - SDS  Facilitative  Categories  **  2-2  36  M -  37  M - 12 - 17  2-  38  F - 11 - 17  1-2-3-4-7-9-14  39  M - 11 - 16  2-  40  F - 11 - 16  2-2-4-7-9- * 10-14- *!_4  41  F - 11 -17  1-2-2-2-6-6-  42  M - 11 - 16  1-2-  43  F - 11 - 16  2-3-3-4-4-4-  6-7-7-8- *9_-14  7-  14-14  *7.-13-14  6-7-8-11  *6_-6-7-8-10-ll  -12  44  M - 12 - 18  45  M - 11 - 16  *3-6-6-6-8-  46  M - 12 - 19  -6-8-11-11  47  F - 12 - 17  *l-2-2-2-2-2-2-  *2_-  *4_  *8-10-ll  *11-11-11-12  *5__ -7-8-86  *2r*  11-14 48  F - 11 - 16  *2-2-2-2-4-4-6-7-9-10-13  49  F - 11 - 17  1-2-2-  *4.-4-6-6-7-12-12-  12-14 50  F - 12 - 19  1-2-3-4-4-8-11-11-13  51  F - 12 -17  2-2-4-11-12-12-12-12-14  Page  215  52  M - 11  - 17  2-2-6-10-11-11- *12.-12-12  53  M - 11  - 17  2-2-4-4-4-6-7-11-14-14  54  F - 12 - 17  1-2-2-4-4-6-6-6- * 10.-10-12 -12-14-14-14  55  F - 11  - 16  1-1-2-2-7-  56  M - 11  - 16  1- * 2 - 2 - 4 - 4 - 4 - 4 - 7 - U  57  M - 12 - 17  58  F - 12  59  F - 11 - 17  60  M - 11  - 16  2-2-3-6-7-11  61  F - 11  - 17  2- *4-4-4-7-7-8-9-10-10-10  - 17  *li-ll  1-3-3- *7-8-10- *13_ 1-2-2-4- *4_-6-7-8-12-12-12 1-2-6-9-10-  -11-12-12 62  F - 11 - 16  63  M - 11  - 16  3-3-4-7-9-10-12  64  F - 12  - 19  2  65  F  66  F - 12 - 18  67  M - 11  - 11 - 15  - 16  4_4_4_ _7_7_7_ -i2 6  8  -11-13  1-2-3-4-4-4-7-7-8-11-11 2-4-4-14 1-2-2-4-7-7-9-10-10 -13-13-13  68  F - 11  - 16  2-4-6-7-7-11-12- *!A  69  F - 11  - 15  2-2-2-2-4-4-6-11-11  70  F - 11  _  2-2-4-6-6-7-7-10-14  *  16  Prototype  ** See A p p e n d i x E f o r c a t e g o r i e s  Page Student  Sex.-Grade-Aae  Hindering  C a t e g o r i e s ** O t h e r  36  M -  12 - 19  3-4  37  M -  12 - 17  1-  38  F - 11 - 17  7-  39  M - 11 - 16  5-6  40  F - 11 - 16  *l-2-2-4-5-5-6  3-6 5-5-5-  *3  *2 1 *l-3-4 -5  41  F - 11 -17  4  42  M - 11 - 16  3-6  43  F - 11 - 16  44  M - 12 - 18  5-5-6-6-7  45  M - 11 - 16  *2_ -4-6-  46  M -  2-4-4-4-6-6-  47  F  48  F - 11 - 16  *5_-5-5-5-5  49  F - 11 - 17  2-2-4-5-5-6-6-  50  F -  12 - 19  2-  51  F -  12 -17  2-3-6-  52  M - 11 -  53  M - 11 - 17  4-4-6-7  54  F -  6-  1-1-3-  55  F - 11 - 16  3-3-3-6-  2-  56  M - 11 - 16  1-  2-  57  M - 12 - 17  58  F -  12 - 19  - 12 - 17  17  12 - 17  12 - 17  1-3-5  5-6  1-  9*6_  4-5-  4-5-6-  2-  2-  4-4  5-  35-  216  2-3-6  Page - 11 -• 17  *1  1-  *4_4-4-4-4-6  4  59  F  60  M - 11 - 16  61  F  - 11 -• 17  1-3-6-6-  62  F  - 11 -• 16  2-5-  63  M - 11 -• 16  2-  64  F  1-  65  F - 11 -- 15  66  F  67  M - 11 -- 16  68  F  - 12 -• 19  - 12 -- 18  - 11 -- 16  *!  3-  2-3 3-  3-3-*2  6-  2-3-3 1-1  4-4-  1-3-5 -*6_  69  F  - 11 -- 15  2- *2-3-  70  F  - 11 -- 16  2-2-4-4-4-5-  *  217  Prototype  ** See A p p e n d i x E f o r c a t e g o r i e s  11-  Page 218 Appendix I TYPE OF STUDENT WHO  PARTICIPATED  IN EACH CATEGORY (SDS)  Category  1.  # of i n c i d e n t s  # of students  Considers educational requirements  2. Expands job  15  14 ( 4 0 % )  57  29 ( 8 3 % )  11  8 (23%)  42  21 ( 6 0 % )  general  options  3. E x p a n d s j o b o p t i o n s in a s p e c i f i c 4. Narrows 5. G u i d e s  field  focus information  search 6. C o n f i r m s likes  2 ( 6%)  28  19 ( 5 4 % )  or c l a r i f i e s  and d i s l i k e s  7. C o n f i r m s  2  or d i s c o v e r s  c a p a b i l i t i e s or incapabilities  31  23 ( 6 6 % )  14  12 ( 3 4 % )  8. S t i m u l a t e s deliberation 9. U n d e r s t a n d i n g over  time  oneself 8  8 (23%)  Page 10. F i n d  o u t where t o  improve 11. M a t c h e s to  12. M a t c h e s  interest  to  12 (34%)  25  17 (49%)  22  11 (31%)  8  6 (17%)  18  13 (37%)  to  jobs 13. M a t c h e s  17 capabilities  jobs  and  219  interest  capabilities jobs  14. C o n f i r m s o r choice  Category  justifies  Sex-Grade-Age  # of Students  Cons i d e r s  F -- 11- 15  1  educational  F -- 11 -  1  requirements  F -- 11 -17  4  F -- 12 -  17  3  F -- 12 - 19  1  F -- 11 -  16  3  M -- 12 -  17  1  16  More  than  1 incident  #45 had 2  Page 2. E x p a n d s job  general  options  F  - 11 -  15  2  #69  had 4  F  - 11 -  16  6  #48  had 4  #40,  F  F  - 11 -  - 12 -  17  17  5  4  #55,  #70  had 2  #41  had  #49  had 2  #47  had  #51, #58 F  - 12 -  18  1  F  - 12 -  19  1  M - 11 -  16  5  M - 11 -  17  2  3,  8.  #54, had 2  #56, #67  #60, had 2  #52,  #53  had  2  #36  had 2  #43  had 2  M - 12 -  17  1  M - 12 -  19  1  F  - 11 -  15  1  options  F  - 11 -  16  1  in a  F  - 11 -  17  1  F  - 12 -  19  1  M - 11 -  16  3  #63  had 2  M - 12 -  17  1  #57  had 2  F  15  2  #65  had  #69  had 2  3. Expands j o b  specific  field  4.  220  Narrows  focus  - 11 -  3;  Page F  F  F  - 11  - 11  - 12  -  -  -  16  17  17  6  3  4  #43,  221  #62  had  3  #48  had  2  #61  had  3  #49  had  2  #47,  #54,  #58  had  2  F  - 12  -  18  1  #66  had  2  F  - 12  -  19  1  #50  had  2  M - 11  -  16  3  #56  had  4  M - 11  -  17  1  #53  had  3  Guides  F  - 12  -  17  1  information  M - 11  -  16  1  F  - 11  -  15  1  F  - 11  -  16  5  search Confirms clarifies likes  or  and  dislikes  F  - 11  -  17  3  #43,  #70  had  2  #41  had  3  #49  had  2  - 12  -  17  3  #54  had  3  M - 11  -  16  2  #45  had  3  M - 11  -  17  3  M - 12  -  17  1  M - 12  -  19  1  F  Page Confirms  or  discovers capabilities  F -  11 -  15  1  F -  11 -  16  7  or  F -  11 -  17  4  F -  12 -  17  2  M -  11 -  16  6  M -  11 -  17  1  M -  12 -  17  2  Understanding  F -  11 -  16  2  oneself  F  -  11 -  17  3  over  M -  11 -  16  2  M -  12 -  17  1  F -  11 -  16  4  F -  11 -  17  2  time  Find to  o u t where  improve  had  #68,  incapabilities deliberation  #62  222  3;  #70  had  2  #61  had  2  #67  had  2  #37  had  2  #61  had  3;  #59  had  2  F -  12 -  17  2  #54  had  2  M -  11 -  16  2  #67  had  2  M -  11 -  17  1  M -  12 -  17  1  Matches  F -  11 -  15  2  #65  had  2  capabilities  F -  11 -  16  3  #55  had  2  to  F -  11 -  17  1  F -  12 -  17  2  #47  had  2  F -  12 -  19  2  #50  had  2  jobs  Page M - 11 — 16  3  #45  had  3  - 17  3  #52  had  2  M - 12 - 19  1  #46  had  2  #49  had  3,  #61  had  2  #51  had  4  #58  had  3  #54  had  2  #52  had  3  #67  had  3  #40  had  2  #54  had  3  M - 11  Matches interest  to  223  F  - 11  - 16  3  F  - 11 - 17  2  jobs F  - 12  - 17  3  M - 11 - 16  2  - 17  1  F  - 11 - 16  1  and  F  - 11  - 17  1  capabi1 i t i e s  F  - 12  - 19  2  M - 11  - 16  1  M - 12  - 17  1  Confirms or  F  - 11  - 16  3  justi f ies  F - 11  - 17  3  choice  F  - 12  - 17  3  F  - 12 - 18  1  M - 11  - 16  1  #39  had  2  M - 11  - 17  1  #53  had  2  M - 12 _ 17  1  M - 11 Matches interest  to  jobs  Page 224 SDS HINDERING  Category  1.  # of i n c i d e n t s  Lack o f m i s l e a d i n g  # of  students  9  8 (23%)  13  10 (29%)  9  9 (17%)  24  13 ( 3 7 % )  21  12 (34%)  20  15 (43%)  4  3 ( 8 % )  information 2.  Misidentification  /  m i s d i r e c t i o n of interests 3.  Irrelevance  o f some  items 4.  U n r e l i a b i l i t y of self-estimates  5.  Fails  to provide  specific 6.  7.  direction  Need e x p a n s i o n o f options  i n finder  No new  information  Category  Sex-Grade-Age  # of Students  1.  Lack o f  F - 11 -- 16  2  misleading  F - 11 -- 17  2  information  F - 12 -- 17  1  F - 12 -- 19  1  More 1  than  Incident  #68 had 2  Page M - 11  - 16  1  M - 12  - 17  1  F - 11  - 15  1  F - 11  - 16  3  Misidentification misdirection  of  interests  3.  Irrelevance some  of  items  /  #40,  #70  had  2  #49  had  2  F  - 11  —  17  1  F  - 12  - 17  1  F  - 12  - 19  1  M  - 11  - 16  2  M  - 12  - 19  1  F  - 11  - 15  1  #69  had  2  F  - 11  - 16  1  #55  had  3  F  - 12  - 17  2  M  - 11  - 16  1  M  - 12  - 19  1  F  - 11  - 16  3  #70  had  3;  #68  had  2  had  5  self-estimates F  - 11  - 17  2  F  - 12  - 17  1  F  - 12  - 19  1  M  - 11  - 16  2  #60  M  - 11  - 17  2  #52,  M  - 12  _  19  2  #53  had  2  #46  had  3  225  Page Fails  to provide  specific  Need  F - 11 - 16  4  direction  expansion  of o p t i o n s i n  new  information  had  5;  #40  had 2  #49  had 2  F  - 11 -  17  1  F  - 12 -  17  2  F  - 12 -  19  1  M - 11 -  16  2  M - 12 -  17  1  #37  had 3  M - 12 -  18  1  #44  had 2  F  - 11 -  16  2  F  - 11 -  17  2  finder  No  #48  #49,  #61  had  2  #45  had 2  F  - 12 -  17  2  F  - 12 -  18  1  F  - 12 -  19  1  M - 11 -  16  3  M - 11 -  17  2  M - 12 -  18  2  #44  had 2  M - 12 -  19  1  #46  had 2  - 11 -  17  1  #38  had 2  M - 11 -  17  1  M - 12 -  18  1  F  226  Page  227  Appendix J TYPE OF STUDENT WHO  PARTICIPATED  IN EACH CATEGORY  Category 1.  tt  of i n c i d e n t s  More r e a l i s t i c occupational  Reality testing  3.  Start planning also  # of students  25  20 (29%)  14  14 (20%)  21  17 (24%)  information  2.  and  (OTHER)  sooner  later  4.  Job hunting s k i l l s  13  12 (17%)  5.  More  13  13 (19%)  9  9 (13%)  3  3 ( 4%)  information  educational 6.  Nothing  decision  More t e s t s t o measure interests  8.  opportunities  else. It'sa  personal 7.  on  Teacher  and  abilities  involvement  Category  2  Sex-Grade-Age  2 ( 3 % )  # of Students  1.  More  than  1 incident  More r e a l i s t i c  F - 11 - 15  1  occupational  F - 11 - 16  11  #30 had 3  information  F - 11 - 17  2  #21 had 2  Page F  M Reality  testing  planning  s o o n e r and later  also  skills  #54  had  2  #35  had  2  1 2  F - 12  - 16  1  F - 12  - 17  6  - 12  - 19  2  M - 11  - 16  2  M - 12  - 17  1  -  11  - 15  1  F - 11  - 16  5  F - 11  - 17  1  - 12 - 17  4  #26  had  2  #66  had  2  #67  had  2  #17  had  2  F  F - 12  - 18  1  F  - 12  - 19  1  M  -  11  - 16  1  M - 12  - 17  2  - 12 - 19  1  F - 11  - 16  3  F - 11  - 17  2  - 12  - 17  5  M - 11  - 16  1  _  1  M hunting  #23,  - 16  F  Job  - 11 - 16  5  F - 11  F  Start  17  12  228  F  M  —  12  17  Page 5.  More on  i n f o r m a t i o n F - 11 -  educational  opportunities  6.  Nothing It's  a  else. personal  - 11 -  17  1  F - 12 -  17  4  M - 12 -  18  1  F - 11 - 16  5  F  F  17  2  M - 12 -  17  1  M - 12 - 19  1  More t e s t s t o  F - 11 -  16  1  measure  F  - 12 -  17  1  interests  F - 12 -  18  1  Teacher  F - 12 - 19  1  involvement  M - 11 -  1  and 8.  7  - 12 -  decision  7.  16  abilities  16  229  Page 230 Appendix K MAP OF CHOICES F A C I L I T A T I V E CATEGORIES  1.  Considers E d u c a t i o n a l Requirements. - knowledge o f t r a i n i n g  2.  Expands G e n e r a l - wider  3.  range  look  into  helpful  Job Options. of o p t i o n s  Expands Job O p t i o n s -  requirements  in a Specific  other r e l a t e d  Field.  fields  - not l i m i t e d - fall  back on s o m e t h i n g  else  - COMPARE o r RELATED r o u t e s 4.  Narrows  Focus.  - Get a d i r e c t i o n , 5.  residence,  travel  - CCDO number Judges Future  Features  l o c a t i o n of  physical  guide)  easy  Work  inside/outside,  conditions,  Answers S p e c i f i c - permits  o f work, t r a v e l ,  working  environmental  7.  field  Stimulates C o n s i d e r a t i o n of E x t r i n s i c - e a r n i n g s , hours  6.  a  Questions access  (reality  test)  of Jobs.  - r e a s s u r i n g and p r o m o t e s s t r a t e g y .  activities (in  Page 231 8.  Provides  Reference  - print-out 9.  Clarifies -  11.  (travel  (being a b l e t o take  (in travel  and A p t i t u d e s .  guide)  Matches I n t e r e s t  and A p t i t u d e s  t o see d i f f e r e n t  12. C o n f i r m a t i o n  to Jobs.  areas  of concern  of choice  D i s c o n f i r m a t i o n of c h o i c e . - reality  SAFEGUARDS: 1.  i t home)  guide) Capabilities  - helped  13.  Planning.  interest  10. C l a r i f i e s -  f o r Future  Useless  test.  CHOICES  (from h i n d e r i n g c a t e g o r i e s )  information.  - stress  t h e use o f t h e " t h i s d o e s n ' t  matter  t o me"  option. 2.  Lack -  of i n f o r m a t i o n .  list  o f c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s  - no l i s t  of courses  necessary  forthcoming.  t o graduate.  - no p l a c e s o f employment. - Provincial Province - detailed  only  (but you can access  t o any  i n Canada). i n f o r m a t i o n on o n l y s t a r r e d  - CCDO number c a n be  researched.  occupations.  Page Fails  to c o n f i r m p r i o r  - Backtrack, - Access -  ***  Stress  how  you  answered  - what  i s needed.  Bargaining.  and  "garbage  - 14  out  choice  preferred choice  Puzzling -  find  232  Inappropriate  i n , garbage  t o p i c s do  not  Job  Options.  out"  cover  every  situation  in a l l  the  of  areas. Ex.: yet  Not  being  wanting  Needed more Rushed on  able  t o be  to stand  a  sight  blood  surgeon.  options.  terminal.  - promote an  attitude  of e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n ,  of  bargaining. - R e s c h e d u l e an Unreliable  h o u r or two  Occupational  after  Machine - only 1  salary  levels  Malfunction. incident  - pretty well  rectified  exposure.  Information  - C o n t i n u a l l y update system, regarding  initial  and  forwarn  students  employment  outlook.  Page Appendix  MAP  What t h e  OF  L  SDS  seven s e c t i o n of the  SDS  w h i c h s e c t i o n s promote w h i c h c a t e g o r i e s ? E,  1.  page  to write  - Narrows  to d e l i b e r a t e ;  reality  of  job  to  - Matches  jobs over  t i m e compare o l d and see  - Stimulates  deliberates  want  - self-understanding  aspirations  focus  ideas,  what p a r e n t s  interest  and  categories  - Expands g e n e r a l  their  daydreams  - f o r c e s one  -  Appendix  options  - listing  not  that i s ,  (from  facilitative  wishes  test  do:  189)  Daydream s e c t i o n  - time  233  new  interest  to  jobs  - Understands oneself  over  time  differences  similarities Hindering  - could  not  options  code daydreams  categories  - Need e x p a n s i o n  of  options  Page 2. -  Activities leaning  to  Facilitative  section  one  - a w a r e n e s s of  - Narrows  area likes  likes  dislikes - what s k i l l s -  interests  to  focus  - Find  improve  or  and  where t o  too 3.  and  capabilities  to  jobs  categories  - Misidentification  sports  - useless  improve  interests  Hindering - no  clarifies  dislikes  out  c a p a b i l i t i e s - Matches  and  categories  - C o n f i r m s or  and  items  (vocabulary  234  Misdirection  of  -Irrelevance  of  /  interests some  items  difficult)  Competencies  - concentrate - what you  i n one  can  Facilitative  section  and  - Narrows  area  can't  do  -  categories  focus  C o n f i r m s or capabilities  discovers of  incapabilities - what s k i l l s  to  - capabilities  improve  to  jobs  - Find  out  where t o  improve  - Matches c a p a b i l i t i e s  to  jobs -  interests  and  c a p a b i l i t i e s - Matches  interest  capabilities Hindering - misdirection  of  interests  to  and jobs  categories  - Misidentification Misdirection  of  /  interests  Page 235 - useless too  items  (vocabulary  o f some  items  difficult)  - unreliability  of s e l f -  estimates - already  4.  -Irrelevance  wider  of s e l f -  estimates - No new  knew  Occupations s e c t i o n  - better  - Unreliability  overall range,  Facilitative  categories  - Expands g e n e r a l j o b  view,  forced  information  look  options  at a v a r i e t y of jobs, feeling  of having  numerous  alternatives - maximize specific the  option i n area  cluster  that i s  - Expands  job options  specific  in a  field  of jobs  available -  - Matches  i n t e r e s t s t o jobs  i n t e r e s t s t o jobs  Hindering - m i s d i r e c t i o n of i n t e r e s t s  categories  - Misidentification Misdirection  5.  Self-Estimates  - Forces  section  one t o l o o k a t  y o u r code more  Facilitative - Confirms  /  of i n t e r e s t s  categories  or d i s c o v e r s  c a p a b i l i t i e s or incapabilities  Page - skills  t o improve  - Capabilities  to  jobs  236  - F i n d o u t where t o improve - Matches c a p a b i l i t i e s  to  jobs - I n t e r e s t s and  c a p a b i l i t i e s - Matches  interests  and  capabi1ities Hindering - U n r e l i a b i l i t y because of  6.  criteria  categories  - Unreliability  of  Estimates  Facilitative  Summary Code  categories  - Expands g e n e r a l -  Interchange  of  letters  cluster  - Narrowing - Interest to - Interest to  jobs capabilities  job options  specific - Narrows  focus  - Matches  interest  to  - Matches  interest  and  Hindering  to  jobs  jobs  categories  - Misidentification  /  code  Misdirection  of  Booklet  Facilitative  categories  with  7.  in a  field  capabilities  - I n t e r e s t s don't agree  job  options - Expands  - Check  Self-  - Educational  level  - Considers  interests  educational  requirements  Page 237 - Job expansion  - Expands g e n e r a l j o b options  - Clustered  jobs  - Expands j o b o p t i o n s specific  -  - Narrows  Narrowing  - CCDO number g u i d e s  search  -Guides  -  lack  of occupational  information - lack  of s p e c i f i c  direction - More j o b s  - Lack  jobs  left  o u t , daydream  jobs  l e f t out  focus  categories  occupational - Fails  search  or m i s l e a d i n g information  to provide  specific p e r c o d e , common  field  information  Hindering  ina  a  direction  -Need e x p a n s i o n o f o p t i o n s  Page SDS:  1.  Need e x p a n s i o n - stress - how  SAFEGUARDS  of o p t i o n s  in  finder:  l i m i t e d number o f o c c u p a t i o n s  to stretch  - 2 letter  code  these instead  U n r e l i a b i l i t y of S e l f - criteria  for self  - show b o o k l e t 3.  of  3  "The  facilitate best,  and  emphasized friends.  Objective -  i s only intended  a person's  a person  efficiently  predict  (lower  prefers: a simple  of  i t cannot choice  for a  expectations)  Holland's d i r e c t i o n s  of  interests:  i f followed  a)  resemblance determined  b)  a l l permutations  c)  code and  daydream  d)  talk  counsellor  to  to  a class  Misidentification/misdirection - Again  (Holland's  occupational search.  only indicate  occupations  person." 4.  estimates  o f SDS  SDS  i t can  jobs  specific direction:  - Forwarn s t u d e n t s quote-)  of  Estimates:  to family  F a i l s to provide  finder  options  - r e f e r r i n g t o CCDO number - c l u s t e r 2.  in  of  5  times  code  comparison  -  At  238  Page 5.  Lack  or m i s l e a d i n g  occupational  information  - N u m e r i c a l system of e d u c a t i o n a l booklet 6.  should  be  I r r e l e v a n c e o f some - No new  explained. items:  information  - an open a t t i t u d e career  level in  planning  i s a p t t o promote  better  239  Page Appendix  Map  1.  - talk  occupational  to people  - video - better 2.  o f work  information.  i n the  field  place  Start planning  t h r o u g h work  s o o n e r and i n grade  - keep d o o r s  Job  hunting  later  8  open  - keep p l a n n i n g  even l a t e r  in  life  skills  - resume w r i t i n g , i n t e r v i e w i n g application 5.  Planning  Reality testing.  - start  4.  Career  literature  - experience 3.  M  o f O t h e r Ways of F a c i l i t a t i n g  More r e a l i s t i c  240  More i n f o r m a t i o n - academic - how  on  writing educational  information  to apply  i t ' s up  skills,  6.  Nothing,  to  7.  More t e s t s t o measure  8.  Teacher  for a  opportunities  - courses  etc.  loan  me. i n t e r e s t s and  abilities  involvement.  - relating  subject  matter  to the  real  world.  Page 241 Appendix N  Letter  and Q u e s t i o n n a i r e  t o 126 E x p e r i e n c e d  Counsellors  June 3, 1986 Dear  Sir/Madam:  Please  take  a few moments t o answer a few  questions  about c a r e e r  will  will  take  concerning return stamped  p l a n n i n g . The 5 o r 10 m i n u t e s i t  help c l a r i f y  the S e l f - D i r e c t e d  the completed envelope  and h e l p v a l i d a t e Search  questionnaire  a  and CHOICES. P l e a s e i n the self-addressed  as soon as p o s s i b l e .  Thank y o u f o r y o u r  co-operation.  Sincerly,  Chuck  Provost  Doctoral  student  Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g U.B.C.  study  Psychology  Page - Have y o u used Yes If  CHOICES w i t h  your  242  students?  No yes, please  and  indicate  t h e number o f y e a r s  answer t h e page on CHOICES.  - Have y o u u s e d  t h e SELF DIRECTED SEARCH  (SDS) w i t h  your  students? Yes  -  No  If yes, please and  How  indicate  t h e number o f y e a r s  answer t h e page on t h e  t h e s t u d y was  done:  A number o f s t u d e n t s had  used  helped helpful  CHOICES o r t h e SDS.  them  (facilitative  were  interviewed after  T h e y were a s k e d  based  indicate  on y o u r  about these  you  t h a t your  agree  experience  whether y o u a g r e e ,  undecided  what had  career  students  less  planning.  as a c o u n s e l l o r , d i s a g r e e or a r e  v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s . That would g e n e r a t e  categories. Thank y o u f o r y o u r  they  c a t i e g o r i e s ) and what was  (hindering categories) in their Now  please  SDS.  contribution.  i s , do  similar  Page  243  C H O I C E S  Facilitative  Categories  1.  Expands g e n e r a l  2.  Expands  Agree  options  job options  in a s p e c i f i c  field  3.  Narrows  focus  4.  Answers  specific  questions 5.  Judges f u t u r e of jobs  6.  Provides future  7.  reference for  planning  Considers  educational  requirements 8.  Stimulates extrinsic  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of work  features  hours, e t c . ) 9.  Clarifies  likes  10. C l a r i f i e s and  capabilities  aptitudes  11. M a t c h e s  interest  and  aptitudes 12. C o n f i r m s c h o i c e s 13. D i s c o n f i r m s  choices  (salary,  Disagree  Undecided  Page Hindering  categories  1.  Lack of i n f o r m a t i o n  2.  Useless  3.  Unreliable  information occupational  information 4.  Fails  to confirm  a  prior  choice 5.  P u z z l i n g and  inappropriate  job options 6.  Questionable narrowing  basis for  jobs  7.  Needs  more o p t i o n s  8.  Rushed  9.  Machine m a l f u n c t i o n  on t e r m i n a l  Any o t h e r  category  you would  like  t o add  Thank  you  244  Page  S E L F  Facilitative 1.  D I R E C T E D  Agree  Categories  Expands g e n e r a l  job  options 2.  Expands  job options  specific 3.  Narrows  4.  Guides  in a  field focus  information  search 5.  Considers  educational  requirements 6.  Confirms and  7.  or c l a r i f i e s  likes  dislikes  Confirms or d i s c o v e r s capabilities  or  incapabilities 8.  Stimulates  9.  Understanding over  10. F i n d  diliberation oneself  time o u t where  to  improve 11. M a t c h e s to  capabilities  jobs  12. M a t c h e s  interest  to jobs  245  S E A R C H  Disagree  Undecided  Page 13.  Matches i n t e r e s t s capabilities  and  to jobs  14. C o n f i r m s o r j u s t i f i e s choices  Hindering 1.  Lack  categories or  misleading  occupational 2.  information  Misidentification misdirection  of  3.  Irrelevence  4.  Unreliability  / interest  o f some  items  of s e l f -  estimates 5.  Fails  to provide  specific  direction 6.  Need e x p a n s i o n o f in  7.  No  options  finder new  information  Any o t h e r  category  y o u would l i k e t o add  Thank you  246  APPENDIX 0 Summary of Similarities and Differences of CHOICES and the SDS  i  JHif  Jiff A  * WORK FEATURES  FACI1  iTIVE  * GUIDES SEARCH  * SPECIFIC QUESTIONS  ft LIKES & DISLIKES  « JUDGES FUTURE  * CAPABILITIES  K REFERENCE  r  * EDUCATION  * DELIBERATION  » LIKES  * NARROWS FOCUS  * UNDERSTANDING  5* CAPABILITIES  * EXPANDS-GENERAL  * MHERE TO IMPROVE  * MATCHES  * EXPANDS-SPECIFIC I * MATCHES CAPABILITIES  « DISCONFIRMS  * CONFIRMS  ft MATCHES INTERESTS ft MATCHES BOTH  HINDERING ft USELESS INFO, ! ft LACK OF INFO•  Ift MISIDENTIFICATION  * UNRELIABLE  * IRRELEVANCE  * RUSHED  * SELF-ESTIMATES  ft MALFUNCTION  * SPECIFIC DIRECTION  * FAILS TO CONFIRM  * OPTIONS IN FINDER  * PUZZLING OPTIONS  ft NEU INFO.  * QUESTIONABLE BASIS * NEEDS MORE OPTIONS  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0053658/manifest

Comment

Related Items