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.