Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly UpdatesIn another review, Watson and McMahon (2005) used learning as a unifying theme to accommodate the dynamic and interactional nature of career development and to highlight the need for a dual focus (on both how children learn and what they learn) about the world of work and their future in it. The authors suggested that how children learn may best be understood as a recursive process between children and a broad array of influences from their social and environmental contexts, such as society (e.g., gender role socialization, socioeconomic status), ethnic background, the media, school, the home environment, and the family. In reviewing what children learn, the authors noted that the predominant topic in childhood career research has been occupational gender stereotyping. They also noted a relative absence of childhood research on self-concept, self-efficacy, career maturity, and values. The authors concluded by specifying three issues contributing to the fragmented nature of the current state of the childhood career development literature. First, the diversity of methodologies makes a cohesive, comprehensive understanding of children's career development learning difficult to achieve. The limited amount of research on childhood career development exacerbates this problem. Second, the diversity of conceptual and definitional issues was acknowledged as limiting the career counseling field's understanding of childhood career development. This problem was said to stem from the observation that although the extant empirical literature identifies career behaviors, it does not explain the process by which these behaviors are learned or the processes through which differences develop across individuals. The focus on identifying behaviors and lack of focus on researching the recursive nature of influences and processes on such behaviors was recognized as a third limitation.
Applied research. Although recent reviews of career intervention studies have focused either predominantly (Baker & Taylor, 1998) or exclusively (Prideaux, Creed, Muller, & Patton, 2000) on high school interventions, a somewhat sparse literature does exist for children. For example, in a meta-analysis of K-12 career education intervention studies, findings demonstrated modest effects. This was thought to be noteworthy given the challenges associated with conducting well-designed experimental research.
Gillies, McMahon, and Carroll (1998) evaluated a 10-week career education program for sixth-grade children. The program, which focused on helping children to acquire a better understanding of self and the diversity of life roles in relation to the world of work, demonstrated only a few differences between the treatment and control groups. The treatment group had a better understanding of the different information sources that could be used to acquire information about: jobs and had a better understanding of how their school learning related to certain jobs. Soudack (1996) examined the impact of a community- based education for work, career, and life program in which students were exposed to community workplaces and workers. Findings indicated that the program had an impact on students' attitudes toward dropping out of school, enjoyment and interest in school, and perceptions of equity in the workplace. Other research has demonstrated positive effects of career education interventions on academic achievement (Evans & Burck, 1992; Peterson, Long, & Biliups, 1999).
Practice
Although the National Standards for School Counseling Programs (American School Counselor Association [ASCA], 2003) explicitly identified career development as an essential component of K-12 school counseling programs, indications suggest that the career development needs of elementary school students remain largely unmet (Whiston, 2002). Citing large student-to-counselor ratios in elementary schools that employ school counselors and the total absence of school counselors in other elementary schools, some have questioned whether school counseling programs are actually meeting the needs of all students comprehensively (Green & Keys, 2001; Whiston, 2002). Indeed, few elementary schools provide comprehensive developmental career guidance programs as outlined by organizations such as ASCA, the National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee (1989), the National Career Development Association (Kobylarz, Crow, & Ettinger, 2004), and state education departments (Schultheiss, 2005b). Even fewer programs focus on the career needs of children with special needs and gifted students (Levinson & Ohler, 2006).
Despite speculation about the degree to which elementary school students' career development needs are being adequately met, there exists a paucity of literature that describes various career intervention practices. For example, there have been descriptions of exploratory and experiential activities, such as a visit to a hospital (Beale, 2000) or how to run a restaurant (Beale, 2003), the use of children's literature to infuse career development concepts (Brathwaite, 2002), and multicultural career fairs (Murrow-Taylor, 1999). Other programs aim to enhance career awareness (Schultheiss, 2005a; Young & Thomas, 1996), career exploration (Richards & Merker, 1997; Stein, 1991; Swartz, 2001), and career planning (Lewis, 1997).
Strengths, Weaknesses, and Opportunities of the Childhood Career Development Literature
Although there is little urgency for children to make immediate occupational choices, there are benefits to developing a meaningful understanding of the relevance of school-based learning to their future careers (Johnson, 2000). Programs that introduce elementary students to the world of work and help them to understand the connection between what they are learning in school and what is expected in the work world are integral to promoting lifelong learning, a productive educational environment, and future successful transitions from school to work to life. The strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities associated with the current state of the childhood career development literature are discussed as follows, with the aim of suggesting directions for future theory, research, and practice.
Strengths
The current literature has a number of strengths, most notably its life span developmental focus. The introduction of life span theories set the stage for the study of childhood career development. Notions of early childhood precursors to adult work attributes and behaviors have guided the field for years. Similarly, explorations of environmental and contextual influences on childhood career development are beginning to emerge. The study and practice of childhood career development are embedded within disciplines such as counseling and psychology that have an explicit focus on diversity and social justice issues. This context creates an environment for research and practice that is inclusive and sensitive to the diverse needs of all people.
National professional organizations have also accomplished much progress in setting standards for practice. The National Career Development Association recently revised their national guidelines, and ASCA has made great strides in incorporating career competencies across the K-12 continuum. Moreover, recent reviews (e.g., Hartung at al., 2005; Watson & McMahon, 2005) have not only summarized the current state of knowledge but also raised awareness of the need for a less fragmented approach to studying childhood career development. It becomes clear through these reviews that systematic research on the antecedents and consequences of early progress in the career domain is greatly needed.
Weaknesses
A shortcoming of the current literature on childhood career development is that, by and large, it is not theory based. Research and practice lack an organizing theoretical framework. Even Super (1990), who offered the most explicit discussion of childhood career development, conceptualized his theory within the context of limited direct interaction or inquiry with children. Instead, systematic in-depth study of adolescent and adult middle-class boys and men set the standards by which all else was inferred. Similarly, SCCT emerged primarily through empirical efforts with late-adolescent and young-adult college students. This does not imply that such theories should not be tested with children. However, this course of action in isolation would leave the field blind to what might be missed by not initiating the study of childhood career development with an in-depth discovery-oriented examination of the very population the field strives to understand. Discovery-oriented theory-building qualitative research could provide a window into the developmental realm of childhood career development as it naturally unfolds across diverse groups of children.
As has been suggested elsewhere (Prideaux et al, 2000), one factor contributing to the limited research on childhood career development may be an overreliance on school counselors and practitioners who are already overextended, underfunded, and perhaps insufficiently trained in experimental research methods. A concurrent overemphasis on university-based research that is too far removed from the realities of the practice world further contributes to an otherwise disjointed body of literature. This schism comes at a time when contemporary demands for evidence-based practices make explicit the need for programmatic research to substantiate the effectiveness of career invention programs (Schultheiss, 2005b; Whiston, 2002). The importance of bridging this gap with collaborative partnerships is a 21st-century reality. The future of childhood career development theory, research, and practice will need to be accessed via collaborative pathways of multidisciplinary partners.
Opportunities
The opportunities derived from early seamless research and practice across the K-12 continuum could be potentially great. Career research on adults, and by proxy children, has focused on interests, abilities, skills, self-efficacy beliefs, and contextual factors. On the other hand, aspects such as social/emotional development, executive cognitive functioning, affect regulation, temperament, and personality characteristics--relevant to lifelong learning and educational and developmental progress--have long been prominent in the child development literature. The time has come for the confluence of knowledge across professional disciplines. The profound role of individual factors embedded within life contexts (e.g., poverty, violence, discrimination, oppression, family, school, and community) are prime targets for future inquiry. Factors such as self-efficacy, locus of control, emotional and learning disabilities, academic achievement, problem solving, critical thinking, information processing, decision making, planning, interpersonal and communication skills, flexibility, adaptability, and toleration of ambiguity are all ripe for the study of childhood career development theory, research, and practice.
FEED