Chapter 6

Chapter 6

Chapter 6 from the Career Information, Career Counseling, and Career Development by Duane Brown is based on Theories and Application of Contextualism and Chaos Theory to Careers. There were 2 contextualist theories discussed in this chapter. The 2 theories that I will elaborate on are considered to be postmodern theories based on positivist philosophy (Brown, D., 2007).

Contextualist Theory by Young, Valach, and Collin

For Young, Valach, and Collin contextualism is the process of weaving parts of one’s contexts into the structure of the self. For example, observing individuals interacting with their families, friends, community, etc. This is a never ending process because individuals continuously interact with others.  The theorist say that the self is a never ending, goal directed pattern that must be understood in the present form. Regarding this theory, counselors should be trying to understand clients as they experience their environment and try to make meaning of their experiences. Young mentions that actions should be taking during the career development process to help guide clients. He breaks down action into 3 parts; observable behavior, the internal processes that cannot be observed, and the meaning or results as interpreted by individuals and others who observe the action. The author then goes on to mention that interpretation is an essential aspect of career counseling and it occurs in 2 levels; the present context and the anticipated context of the future. As counselors we should be helping to make sense of our clients experiences. Then as counselors we should be turning those interpretations into constructs and then into themes (Brown, D., 2007).

Career Construction Theory by Savickas

Regarding this theory Savicka decides to use terms such as identity narrative and life portrait instead of lifestyle. As a theorist he believes that life themes are interpretations of our clients stories and early recollections starting at age 4. He insists that the construction of one self occurs through a reflective process, that is thinking about the self, and interpreting thoughts as they occur. Savicka has come up with 3 conceptualizations of self, the first one being objective self. This conceptualization is observable, measured, and can be compared. The subjective self is when a client acts on their own goals, develops a data set about self and careers, and makes decisions. Lastly, there is the project self which compared to an unstable work structure and digital revolution. Savicka emphasizes that the self-starts to develop when children start to model others such as their parents or teachers.  Lastly, he poses that “adaptiveness" is the ability to negotiate the events of one’s life, is the result of the interplay among the skill sets developed by the individual as they play out across the 4 dimensions of the model” (Brown, D., 2007).

Conclusion

This chapter mentions 2 contextualist theories that are somewhat different. Young’s theory is based on observing clients while Savicka’s theory is focused more on identity and the self. Either way each theory is intended to understand an individual and what makes up their identity.

Reference

Brown, D. (2007). Career information, career counseling, and career development. 

Chapter 6

Brown Chapter 6

In Brown (2016), two contextualist theories have been presented to the reader. The first theory which was authored by Young, Valach, and Collin (2002), believes the the self is created in an ongoing, goal-directed pattern that must be understood in the present (pg. 103). While they do agree that when individuals learn about themselves as they interact with their families, communities, peer groups, and work environments, they also believe it is important of career counselors to try to understand the individual as they experience their environment and try to but meaning to it (Brown, 2016, pg. 103). Young et al. (2002) theorize that career-related behaviors are goal-directed results of the individuals’ construction of the context in which he or she functions. Also, they believe that the actions taken to choose a career involve goal-oriented behaviors that include observable behavior, the internal process that cannot be observed, and meaning or results as interpreted by the individuals and others who observe the action (Brown, 2016, pg. 104). I really enjoyed the example of the person who finds her job as boring and unworthy of her labor. The compensation she receives each week may be viewed as the only reason to keep the job. Other people in her family could judge her as being heroic for doing such a generous deed.

To some degree, the theory presented by Savickas (1995, 2002, 2013) bring together the other two theories. Savickas praises the work of Holland and thinks its important to expose his clients to the six personality types of the Holland code. Ultimately, he believes the construction of the self occurs through a reflective process, which means thinking about self and interpreting the thoughts as they occur in context (Brown, 2016, pg. 105). The most interesting part of Savickas’s (1995, 2002, 2013) theory is the idea that he views the “self as project.” For most workers, he believes that career development will be a work in progress that will involve starting and stopping points, upgrading one’s training and retooling completely,and more or less a sense of instability (Brown, 2016, pg. 105). One the more applicable concepts presented on Savickas’s (1995, 2002, 2013) Career Counseling Model is the five step approach. The five steps are construction, deconstruction, reconstruction, construction, and action (Brown, 2016, pg. 108). I enjoyed how in Table 6.2 how both Counselor and Client’s tasks were both presented and described. 

In the Guindon and Hanna (2002) article, they present the idea that unpredictable instances of meaningful coincidence can play a significant role in career opportunities. 

One of the more interesting things I was able to pull from this paper was the idea that traditional career counseling approaches alone may not be sufficient in assisting an individual to find meaningful life’s work (pg. 205). Self-exploration, values-based intervention, and non judgmental are things that counselors can do to help clients figure out their career goals. Lastly, there are four elements that can lead to synchronistic thinking for counselors; understanding the existence and universality of synchronistic phenomena, willingness to investigate one’s own sense of spirituality, willingness to be unconventional in the face of what is conventional and ability to use non traditional techniques as part of the career development process (Guindon and Hanna, 2002, pg. 206)

Brown, D. (2016). Career information, career counseling, and career development (11^thed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN 978-0-13-391777-2.

Guindon, M. H., & Hanna, F. J. (2002). Coincidence, Happenstance, Serendipity, Fate, or the Hand of God: Case Studies in Synchronicity. The Career Development Quarterly, 50(3), 195-208. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2002.tb00894.x

Blog 4

            The Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) is one of the more interesting theories that we have read about in my opinion. The part of this theory that is particularly appealing to me is the emphasis on the interaction between the people and their environment, as well as the importance of self-efficacy and context (Brown, 2016, p. 91-92). Being a psychobiology major in undergraduate study, I have always been fascinated with the debate of nature versus nurture and how these variables play out in regards to different aspects in the development of an individual. One of the very first things that we learn in psychology and biology in regards to this debate is that it is not usually a one-sided coin, but rather nature and nurture work in concordance. I believe that this can be seen in SCCT, specifically in regards to the self-efficacy beliefs. According to Brown (2016), “Self-efficacy beliefs are dynamic, ever-changing self-perceptions that individuals hold about their abilities to perform particular tasks (p. 91). In the central propositions of the SCCT, Brown (2016) further explains how these self-efficacy expectations and outcome expectations work in tandem to help form interests, intentions and/or goals, and activities which will all lead to some sort of performance outcome (p. 92). As I analyzing the diagram provided by Brown (2016), I could not help but to think how it looked extremely similar to the gene expression diagrams that I had learned about in undergraduate study (p. 92). In the gene expression diagrams, an individual starts out with certain genetic predispositions, and based on these predispositions, the person will expose themselves (or not expose themselves) to different situations, have certain interests, participate in certain activities, etc, which will all then lead to an outcome that will again influence the gene expression by either exasperating or dampening it. It is a cycle, just similar to the cycle regarding self-efficacy in SCCT.

            I also really appreciated how chapter five in Brown (2016) addressed the socioeconomic theories in career development. In analyzing the career development of any individual I think that it is important to put it in the context of the sociological variables that surround a person. The dual labor market theory is one that I had never heard of before this class and I think that it offers an interesting twist on how to look at careers, although it has been critiqued for being too simplistic (Brown, 2016, p. 99). Having a job at a peripheral location for the past 10 years, I can attest to some of the challenges, such as they’re not being a lot of room for upward mobility in the company (although I am an exception to this) (Brown, 2016, p. 99). However, I would disagree with that all peripheral companies make no long-term commitment to their employees (Brown, 2016, p. 99). I think that many individuals who are in this work environment can experience commitment from a company to be hired back for their seasonal or temp jobs, or to be called back in when they are called upon.

References

Brown, D. (2016). Career information, career counseling, and career development. United States of America: Person Education, Inc.

Blog 4: Chapter 5

Chapter five discusses the Krumboltz’s Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) which was constructed from the sociocognitive theory of Albert Bandura (Brown, 2016, p. 91-92). I wanted to focus on the six central propositions of SCCT and how they apply to the career development process.

The first idea focuses on the interaction between people and their environments and how the influence of each are intertwined. It makes sense that this relationship would influence one’s career development. If a work environment is negative, then it’s likely going to have the same effect on the employees. This can be applied to employees as well. If an employer or employee has a constant negative or positive attitude, it can have a significant impact on the workplace environment. The second idea is that “career-related interest and behaviors are influenced by several aspects of the person: gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, disabilities, behavior, self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, goals, and genetically determined characteristics.” This supports Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise. A variety of factors, especially gender and age of interventions are critical in the career development process. The third idea is that self-efficacy beliefs and expectations of outcomes are major components in interest-development. I agree that individuals are likely going to pursue interests that they believe will generate valued outcomes. This applies directly to career development, in that individuals will likely seek careers that they perceive they are capable of accomplishing.

Fourth idea also supports Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise, in that various factors like gender, physical health, disabilities, environmental variables, and race can influence the direction of one’s life decisions. When deciding a career path, it makes sense that these factors would influence the direction in which one perceives they can pursue. The fifth idea talks about the career choice and implementation are influenced by both indirect and direct factors, separate from self-efficacy, expectations of outcomes, and goals. I immediately thought of legal issues. If someone has a felony, it will directly impact their future career decisions. Despite their age or rehabilitation process, they will always have a barrier on their pursuit for higher education and/or a career. It’s something that we need to address as a society, because it has a direct impact on our unemployment and recidivism rates. Also, I thought about the accessibility of financial aid, and how parental salaries can impact the amount of funding a student maybe eligible for. It was a major factor in many of my friends and family’s ability to go to their school of choice. Finally, the sixth idea was that performance in educational activities and occupations directly correlates with one’s ability, self-efficacy beliefs, goals, and outcome expectations. It states that those that perform at the highest levels possess the highest self-efficacy beliefs and strongest abilities. However, it contributes environmental factors to having a continuous influence on these factors. It makes sense that these factors would have a direct relationship and outcome.

            In conclusion, I think these theories need to consider the cognitive factors that are also important in the career development process. It identifies the important social learning aspects that help explain some of these career-related behaviors. However, a holistic approach that addressed the spiritual, cognitive, emotional, and development factors would provide a better understanding of the career development process.

Brown, D.  (2016).  Career information, career counseling, and career development. (11th ed., pp. 91-92).  Boston, MA: Pearson.

 

Blog 4- Mary

Connecting Brown Chapter 5 and Savickas (1995)

In the Brown (2016) reading for this week, I appreciated learning about the application of the Career Information Processing (CIP) Theory in that it walked a subtle balance of using both subjective and objective approaches for addressing career indecision.  While overall I still favor a more subjective, constructivist, narrative-based approach that Savickas (1995) so convincingly made a case for in last week's reading, I have to admit I did enjoy the crisp practicality and seven steps of the CIP model.  Furthermore, I appreciated one thing in particular: the CIP approach does not go directly to the problem (indecision) but instead starts with the person's subjectivity and inner knowledge of self. 

To explain, the premise of the CIP method is that people develop two types of knowledge about careers, self-knowledge and career-knowledge.  If the individual in counseling does not demonstrate a high level of self-knowledge first and foremost, then the counselor will not even begin to delve into career-knowledge assessment or decision making.  That is, in Peterson and colleagues' (2002) seven step model for CIP career counseling, step #1 includes conducting the initial interview where the client's needs are expressed; step #2 is where the counselor and client determine the client's readiness to engage in career decision making. The first factor in determining readiness is if the client demonstrates a high level of self-knowledge and a willingness to use that knowledge (Brown, 2016, pgs. 97-98). If a high level of self-knowledge is not demonstrated in this meeting, I would think that the counselor is unable to move to step #3, where the client and counselor mutually define the problem and analyze causes and instead must focus on the client's sense of self and running narrative.  Admittedly, step #3 is a shift away from the whole person and her narrative as the focus and towards the problem and her indecision as the focus (and I'm not crazy about that shift). However,  I do appreciate that, in the CIP approach, the counselor does not automatically go towards the problem. The client must first express her subjectivity and demonstrate a clear understanding of herself well before she is able to formulate career goals (step #4), develop an individual learning plan (step #5), implement the plan (step #6) and, finally, evaluate goal attainment based on self-knowledge/career-knowledge gained (step #7).  

Again, the focus is first on the whole person in the CIP method of career counseling and only secondly on her career problem, and I am glad to see this order of priorities in the balance between the subjective and objective. Brown does acknowledge, though, that the CIP model is far from perfect in that there is little information about its application to racial and ethnic minorities, disabled, and LGBTQI clients, and it is intrusive enough to be culturally inappropriate for groups such as Asian Americans and Native Americans (Brown, 2016, p. 98).  I would consider these cautions seriously if I were ever to use the CIP method. That being said, I did find it to be an especially balanced and easy-to-grasp method for addressing an individual's career indecision.

Brown, D. (2016). Career information, career counseling, and career development (11^thed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN 978-0-13-391777-2.

Savickas, M.L. (1995). Constructivist counseling for career indecision. Career Development Quarterly, 43(1), 363-373.

Sassaman--Ch. 5 & Savickas

Chapter 5 & Savickas

This week’s reading, combined with completing the genogram and my previous job as a college adviser in low income high schools had me really fired up about socioeconomic status.  I am having a hard time understanding how these theories can be applied to individuals who are not fortunate, by which I mean very low income.  In my mind, it doesn’t matter if you are wavering and want to change careers, as discussed in Savickas article, if you can’t afford the luxury of higher education.  Brown said something in towards the end of the chapter that I really connected to: “family social status as it relates to occupational choice has been a variable of great concern…has been found to be a powerful predictor of ultimate occupational attainment,” (Brown, pg. 99).  I would even say that family social status also realty effects education choices, therefore effecting occupational attainment.  Honestly I have so many instances where students could not attend college because it just wasn’t affordable.  Even if they qualify for the full Pell, PHEAA, and federal loans, there is almost always still a gap, unless they are attending community college.  And that can work for some students, but in most cases they are under matching.  Not to mention the statistics for student who actually go on to earn a degree from a 4-year university are terrible.  Perhaps even worse, student who ignore the advice of others and go to a school they cannot afford but take out astronomical debt, just to drop out once they realize the can’t afford it.  Then they have debt and no degree to obtain a higher level job to earn more pay.  Additionally, through my genogram I saw how many of my family members did not attend college.  There just weren’t the funds available, both of my grandfathers dropped out of school after the 8^th grade!  Thankfully nowadays that doesn’t happen as often with more federal resources to support low income families, however, it does still have a trickledown effect.  Think about it: If a student doesn’t go to college because their parents cannot afford it, they may be able to secure a job and at beat eventually make 45k/year.  If they have children, they likely won’t’ be able to assist in that student’s education.  If that student decides to go to college and take out loans themselves, they are likely to be so burden with those loans they won’t be able to assist their children, and so on and so on. 

            Clearly this is a subject very near and dear to my heart.  Which is why I’m quite saddened to see our book dismiss these theories so quickly.  The status attainment theory (SAT) is criticized for being too simplistic (Brown, pg. 99).  Socioeconomic status, which I personally believe is the number one factor in occupational goals/ career path, does not seem to have the same thought out theories as other factors.  In fact, Brown says, “socioeconomic theories have not been developed to advance practice,” (Brown, pg. 99).  I really hope that there is some more research in this area.  Especially since as school counselors we will be working with students of varying SEC status; I think it deserves a lot more of our attention. 

References

Brown, D. (2016).  Career information, career counseling, and career development, (11th ed.). Chapel Hill, NC: Pearson. 

Chapter 5

            In reading Chapter 5, we learn about Krumboltz and his Theory of Happenstance and Decision Making. Within this theory, Krumboltz identifies four factors that he believes influence individual development and the career decision-making process and choice. These factors include: genetic endowment and special abilities, environmental conditions and events, learning experiences, and task approach skills (Brown, 2016, p. 89). I found the genetic endowment and special abilities factor especially interesting. Although it makes sense to take it that into consideration, I had never thought about it before. Brown gives the example of physical abilities such as hand-eye coordination and musical or artistic ability. If someone is lacking in either of those areas, he or she most likely will not choose to pursue a career in those fields. Someone who does not know how to play a musical instrument will not choose a career as a music teacher.

            In the restatement of the Happenstance Learning Theory (HLT), Krumboltz discards the idea that the goal of career counseling should be to choose a career based on personal traits, but rather to facilitate the achievement of self-knowledge (Brown, 2016, p. 90). This contradicts some of the other learning theories we have already learned about, but I tend to agree with Krumboltz. People spend years learning from others, but ultimately, it comes down to what they know themselves. Taking the opportunity to discover different careers and what they entail and expanding your own knowledge is incredibly important. According to Krumboltz, “individuals who do not learn to take advantage of the learning opportunities that are presented to them on an ongoing basis are likely to make poor decisions” (Brown, 2016, p. 90).

In my own life, I did not take advantage of all of the learning opportunities that I had the chance to. I went into college undecided, declared my major at the end of my first year, but did not decide what exactly it was that I wanted to do until after I graduated. I had to take the time to do the research on my own and figure out what it was that I wanted to do. Not everyone will do that, though. Some people may not want to do any research and may go into a career blind. This could be a “poor decision” that Krumboltz was referring to. Going into a career without any prior consideration could result in turnover or burnout.

Brown, D. (2016). Career information, career counseling, and career development (11^th ed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN 978-0-13-391777-2.

Chapter 5

While reading chapter 5, there were some topics that I found to be really interesting. One of the topics was the social cognitive perspective on careers. I found the central prospective of social cognitive theory very relevant and true. For example, I believe that the interaction between people and their environments are very influential. When I was considering going to Arkansas State, the environment had a big impact on why I chose to go there as a freshman in college. Everyone was so nice and genuine and seemed like they really wanted me to be there (the upper class-man soccer girls that I was staying with). It made it such a better environment then going somewhere where they could have cared less if you came to their school or not. The environment had a huge impact on my decision. Although this did not have much of an impact on my career, this is where my career had started and I do not think I would be where I am today in my career if I had not gone there my freshman year of college. 

            Another thing that I found really interesting in chapter 5 was the case of L. In the beginning of case L, I kept thinking, what does SHE want? Why is she talking about what her dad wants, what her philosophy professor says, or what the girl on her floor says? I kept thinking, what is it that she wants. She kept talking about what everyone else was suggesting to her but she never said how she felt about it. It wasn't surprising to see that she went to the career development counselor looking for them to give her a set answer on what she should do. After learning in my Counseling and Theory I class that most student's come to you looking for you to tell them what to do, this was not surprising to me. It was really cool however to see how the career counselor reacted and responded in this situation. The counselor did not tell her what to do, but instead, asked her questions that would help her figure it out herself. 

            As I have mentioned before, I really like reading the articles that are assigned and that tie in to what we are learning about. The article this week was comparing the objective and subjective experience. I enjoyed reading the case study because it gave me a good example of how they used it and it also brought some questions to mind and really got me thinking. The case study illustrates how one counselor sought to foster a student's career development by helping her articulate a life theme that made explicit the pattern of her unfolding life, portrayed a clear and stable identity, and gave her a voice to her identity and ambitions for the future (Savickas, 1995). The three categories that the counselor asked her to talk about were family stories, identity stories and relating indecision to life theme. One question that came to mind while I was reading the case study was how did sharing the stories from her childhood have anything to do with her career development? How did something that happen when she was 3-6 years old, affect her choice in career? It was interesting to see how everything tied together in the end and that is what I like about this is that everything somehow relates to the other. 

Brown, D. (2016). Career Information, Career Counseling, and Career Development (11^th ed.). New York: Pearson.

Savickas, M.L. (1995) Constructivist counseling for career indecision. Career Development Quarterly, 43(1), 363-373

Chapter 5 - Nicole

I found this chapter to be interesting, especially the part in the chapter that talked about Krumboltz’s “four factors that influence on the individual development and ultimately the career decision-making process” (Brown, 2016). The first stage is about the genetic and innate abilities a person already has. I think that the first stage is an important start to the rest of the stages, the second stage is about the environmental factors.  The third and fourth stages are learning experiences and task approach skills. Learning experiences are all of the previous education. Krumboltz identified two learning experiences; they are instrumental and situational experiences. Task approach skills are modified each time an outcome is different the approach changes. The four stages complement each other because both of those two factors incorporate aspects of all life.  You could use those stages for something other than careers.

Another theory that I found interesting was the Social Cognitive Career Theory. It is based off of Albert Bandura’s Sociocognitive theory. Both Krumboltz and Bandura’s theories parallel each other, but they also are different. They both have an importance on focusing on the self. I mainly found it interesting that it paralleled Bandura’s theory, but the theory has been used to do different research on the influences on career.

There were also a various types of socioeconomic theories. There was one about statuses, and how similar to the chart in chapter four that ties the social statues to different occupations. People tend to pick jobs not based on their experiences but rather what pays more or what looks better to have. Would you rather be a janitor or a doctor?  A doctor would be my guess at your response. Why? Doctors have a more glamorous job, the save lives have relationships with other doctors. That is how the television portrays that job, while janitors don’t have a show about a group of janitors working and the relationships they share.

Another socioeconomic theory is about dual labor market. People are noticing that there are several different companies that have the same job opening up, and they have different names. Would you rather work for Pepsi or Captain Flavor (totally made up soda company that is only open from spring until the end of summer)? Most would pick the brand that is more popular and can give them full time employment. There are two different types of opportunities in the labor mark, thus why it is a dual market theory. The two different types are core firms and peripheral firms. Core is the name brand type of companies that are open year round while peripheral are seasonal companies or offer no long-term jobs. The creators of this theory noted that it is too simple-minded, but it does point out attributes that people look for when searching for employment.

Brown, D. (2016, 2012, 2007). Career Information, Career Counseling, and Career Development. 

      NC: Pearson Education.