The structure of school career development interventions: implications for school counselors - Special issue: career development and the changing workplace

Professional School Counseling, April, 2003 by Cass Dykeman, Chris Wood, Michael A. Ingram, Dale Pehrsson, Naomi Mandsager, Edwin L. Herr

Note: The work reported herein was supported under the National Dissemination for Career and Technical Education, PR/Award (No. VO51A 990004) as administered by the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education. However the contents do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the Office of Vocational and Adult Education or the U.S. Department of Education, and the reader should not assume endorsement by the federal government.

Each year, large sums of state and federal dollars are spent on career development provided through America's public schools. The annual federal expenditure alone on career development interventions exceeds one billion dollars (Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act, 1998). Such expenditures are seen as a sound investment, for it is believed that they increase the relevance of education for America's youth (Herr & Cramer, 1996). However, despite these benefits, researchers have not attempted to define the actual structure of career development interventions that occur in America's secondary schools. Without the knowledge of such a structure, real progress in career development interventions research and practice will be either severely circumscribed or absent.

This taxonomic research project was undertaken in order to develop a taxonomy of career development interventions provided through America's secondary schools. In his monograph on typologies and taxonomies in the social sciences, Bailey (1994) commented that "without classification, there could be no advanced conceptualization, reasoning, language, data analysis, or for that matter social science research" (p. 1).

The production of a career development interventions taxonomy has benefits for both researchers and practitioners. First of all, a taxonomy would bring a standardized nomenclature both in terms of content and structure to this area of classifying interventions. With this standardization, different initiatives then can be accurately compared and contrasted (Brickell et al., 1974). One of the major problems noted in the reviews of early career development research was the lack of definition of the treatment. Because of this lack of definition, the reviewers found it difficult to draw an accurate conclusion about the relationship between career development interventions and important outcomes such as student achievement (Bhaerman, 1977; Bonnet, 1977; Evans & Burck, 1992; Hoyt, 1980).

When a field lacks a taxonomy, it is difficult to compare the efficacy of certain types of interventions against other sets of interventions (e.g., guidance curriculum vs. experience-based learning). This lack of comparative research leaves school counseling practitioners with no alternative other than employing an inefficient and expensive "shotgun" approach to career development for America's youth.

Brickell et al. (1974) held that since taxonomies can be used to generate a set of distinctive choices, they can help frame the debate about what choices to make. Thus, policymakers at all levels can draw useful guidance from them. With a taxonomy, school counseling researchers can explore systematically and comprehensively questions about the relationship between career development interventions and desired student outcomes. For example, one outcome question might be: "Does the sequencing of career development interventions taxa interact with a successful transition to postsecondary education?" Another important question that the production of a taxonomy would open for study is: "For students of color, which career development intervention taxa most leverage academic achievement?"

A taxonomy can also help with other formative evaluation questions. For example, a taxonomy of career development interventions would give a school counselor a parsimonious framework within which to examine if there are areas of career development where her or his district is underdeveloped (Bailey, 1994). Moreover, the school counselor could use this taxonomy to map programmatic progress (Brickell et al., 1974). For example, using a taxonomy as a guide, a group of school counselors discovers that their district does a lot of career-related curriculum activities but no activities at work sites in the community. Thus, these school counselors could become advocates in their district for a more balanced career development program.

METHOD

Participants

The participants for this study were drawn from a random sample of 12% (n = 194) of the membership of the Guidance Division of the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE). The following were excluded from the sample: (a) members of the research team (n = 1), (b) surveys returned by the postal service with no forwarding address (n = 7), and (c) surveys returned by potential respondents claiming lack of ability or desire to complete the instrument (n = 6). Thus, the final sample size was 179. Of the 179, a total of 101 surveys were returned for a 60% return rate. This return rate is a strong one given the length of the survey which contained 220 items. The participants in this study were highly educated and had extensive professional experience in the career development field. The vast majority (88%) possessed at least a master's degree. The average number of years of professional experience with career development activities was 15. The majority were female (71%); persons of color represented 16% of respondents. A little more than three quarters of the participants worked in K-12 settings (76%). Approximately one half of the participants worked as school counselors (55%). The professions of the other respondents were teacher (13%), administrator (14%), paraprofessional (1%), and other (13%).