Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In the introductory article to this special section on children's career development, McMahon and Watson (2008) review the persistent call in recent
decades for a more comprehensive, integrative, and holistic approach to career
theory, research, and practice in the study of children's career development.
They describe the need for a greater focus on process issues and the need to
embed children's career development within life span career development.
In addition, the present inadequate recursiveness between theory, research,
and practice and the consequences this has had for practical intervention
in the earlier phases of career development have been identified. It is clear
that the career literature on children is both disparate and generally lacking
in depth (Watson & McMahon, 2004).
The aim of this special section was to invite prominent scholars in the field
of children's career development to consider these challenges. Specifically,
invited contributors were asked to refiect on three themes: the status quo
of children's career development literature, the issues facing the field, and
the fiiture directions that could be considered. Two of the articles provide a
more conceptual understanding of the needs in the field (Hrtung, Porfeli,
& Vondracek, 2008; Schultheiss, 2008), two articles provide examples of
programmatic research that is responsive to these needs (Helwig, 2008;
Tracey & Sodano, 2008), and one article describes proposed programmatic research (Porfeli, Hrtung, & Vondracek, 2008).
The current summative article explores the five invited contributions in
relation to the suggested themes. We believe that the status quo of children's
Mark Watson, Department ofPsychology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University,
Port Elizabeth, South Africa; Mary McMahon, School ofEducation, The University
of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Correspondence concerning this
article should be addressed to Mark Watson, Department of Psychology, Nelson
Mandela Metropolitan University, PO Box 77 000, Port Elizabeth, 6031, South
Africa (e-mail: mark.watson@nmmu.ac.za).
2008 by the National Career Development Association. All rights reserved.
75
77
tung et al. (2008) discuss the possibility that there is less of a cultural
moratorium involving freedom from work and responsibility for the
present generation of children. This issue raises questions again about
established career theory. For instance, is Super's (1957, 1974, 1990)
conception of childhood in earlier decades generationally removed from
childhood experiences of the present decade.'
The introductory article to this special section refers to the concerns of
two recent major reviews of research on children's career development
(Hrtung, Porfeli, & Vondracek, 2005; Watson & McMahon, 2005). The
articles in this special section identify similar concerns to these reviews.
There is a sense of dj vu when reading the invited contributors' comments on children's career development research because they introduce
a research agenda with a long-standing history. This raises the question
of why historically identified issues related to children's career research
remain essentially the same issues today. For instance, there is consistent
criticism of the lack of a theoretical and organizing framework within
which to conduct research on children's career development (Hrtung
et al., 2008; Schultheiss, 2008).
This lack of an organizing framework has contributed to another major
issue in career research on childrenthat ofthe diverse and fragmented
research base that presently informs the field's understanding of children's
career development. Related to this issue is the call for research to be
conducted contextually, particularly in terms of life span developmental
theory (Schultheiss, 2008). Although there is evidence of interdisciplinary contextualization in research on children's career development, it
seems difficult to translate this into an interdisciplinary body of" research
when the research appears in a wide range of academic journals, thus
increasing the fragmented dissemination of research findings.
There is a persistent theme identified in most articles concerning the
fact that theory does not inform research and practice and that research
does not inform theory and practice (e.g., Porfeli et al., 2008). Hrtung
et al.'s (2008) article on a rationale for research on children's career development provides a potential framework for interrelating research with
theory and practice. They introduce several dimensions around which
extant and fiature research could be analyzed, including the constructs of
career exploration, career awareness, vocational expectations and aspirations, vocational interests, and career maturity/career adaptability.
There are several issues raised about career practice as it relates to
children's career development. Common to most of these issues is the
isolation of practice from theory and research as well as the effectiveness
of career intervention as it currently stands. Porfeli et al. (2008) point
to the gap between career interventions at an elementary school level
and the research that should inform such interventions. They argue that
such a gap reinforces the identified gap between school and work and
between school counseling practice and developmental science.
There are other gaps evident in career practice and children's career
development. Schultheiss (2008) notes the gap between research and the
policy initiatives that drive career intervention. This gap results in career
programs for children that are not well informed about how children
arc socialized and how they develop an orientation to the world of work
within family, school, and community contexts. This state of affairs probably contributes to another point that Schultheiss makes: Career guidance
78
programs often fail to meet the national guidelines set for them. Porfeli et
al, (2008) identify another gap between career development intervention
in elementary schools and the commitment of school resources to such
efforts. These authors argue that this gap creates significant barriers to
the career development of all children but particularly for those children
who face an accelerated transition into the workforce.
Research has frequently made recommendations related to career intervention. For example, Tracey and Sodano (2008) are able to identify
suitable times for career intervention as well as the content to be addressed in this intervention. However, there remains a lack of empirical
research to validate career interventions at the elementary school level,
a situation identified by Porfeli et al. (2008) as another issue that has
an impact on career practice and children's career development. One
reason for this is the lack of assessment tools with which to conduct
evaluations as well as the questionable validity of extant instruments that
attempt to provide such validation. Where research has focused on career
intervention at the elementary school level, results have not always been
encouraging. Helwig's (2008) article describes longitudinal research that
indicates that, retrospectively, interventions at this developmental level
were found to be of less help than originally perceived.
There is a need to become more proactive in interrelating research and
practice in children's career development, Porfeli et al, (2008) believe
that such proactivity could prevent career exploration foreclosure in
children in general and in minority group children in particular. The
authors further state that this proactivity could also stimulate academic
performance in elementary school children through promoting more
explicit connections between school and thinking and between work and
doing, thus closing several gaps identified earlier in this article.
79
There is some diversity in suggestions for the fiiture direction of theory and
children's career development. Several authors call for the revision of extant
theory. Porfeli et al. (2008) suggest that a critical step in advancing e career
theory of children is to identify extant core theoretical constructs with the
development of sound instruments to measure these constructs. Tracey and
Sodano (2008) provide a practical example of research that is responsive to
the need to find out whether extant theory applies to children. They found
support for a trait conceptualization ofinterests such as is proposed in Holland's
(1997) theory. Schultheiss (2008) also considers extant theory and suggests
that revision of such theory could be a way forward. However, Schultheiss
suggests that a more radical step may be required in that there is a need to
start at the beginning again in formulating a new theoreticalfi-ameworkwithin
which to understand children's career development. Schultheiss proposes that
there is an opportunity at this point to provide discovery-oriented theory
building that is based on qualitative research. This suggests that although the
regeneration of extant theory is one possibility, going back to the drawing
board, as Schultheiss phrases it, could lead to the generation of new theory
and the reinvigoradon of the field.
Central to these suggestions for theory building is the question of
whether children's career development should be researched from an
existing theoretical base or whether a new theory needs to be developed
founded on a research base. It seems to us that this is a theoretical dilemma
that the field needs to engage in more vigorously. It raises questions as to
whether existing career constructs may constrain the field's thinking of
children's career development, on the one hand, but it also suggests that
a theory specific to children may make developmental contextualization
with later career stages more difficult to achieve.
Underpinning the debate about the future direction of this theory is the
possibility that an intensified focus on children's career developmental theory
(and, indeed, on the career research of children) may create a new, disparate
body of research and theory that wl mirror the present fi-agmented status
of the career literature. It alerts the field to the possibility that the greater
unity sought in the career literature on children may diminish the potential
richness of a more disparate body of theory and research.
As with the discussion on theory, there is a call for future research to
embed contextual and interdisciplinary fi'ameworks within children's career
development. Schultheiss (2008) calls for multidisciplinary partners that
would provide a context inclusive of other disciplines as well as provide
organizing dimensions and constructs for future research and practice.
She suggests collaborative intervention-based research that is inclusive
of developmental psychology, developmental-contextual models, and
family influences, among other disciplines.
The discussion of a contextual fi-amework for the study of children's career
development goes beyond a discussion of the potential theory base. One
focus of discussion is on what research of children's career development
should be related to. There is a call from several authors to relate research
more closely to theory and for research to providefi-ameworkswithin which
their findings can be understood. Tracey and Sodano's (2008) research
provides an example of how research can be grounded in theory as they
explore interest stability within four overlapping conceptions of" interest
development. This research also offers a useful fi-amework for reviewing
research on vocational interests.
80
Conchisinn
It is evident from this special section that concerns raised about the present and niture status ofthe literature on children's career development
persist. The view through the door remains limited. The invited articles
reinforce the fact that the field continues to describe children's career
development from a restricted and limiting base, whether this base be
theoretical, research, or practice. It is also clear that there are consistent
efforts to address and redress these concerns. These efforts remain largely
The Career Development Quarterly
81
References
Hrtung, P. J., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2005). Child vocational development:
A review and reconsideration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 385-419.
Hrtung, P. J., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2008). Career adaptability in childhood. The Career Development Quarterly, 57, 63-74.
82
Tracey, T. J., & Rounds, J. (1993). Evaluating Holland's and Gad's vocational interest
models: A structural meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 229-246.
Tracey, T. J. G., & Sodano, S. M. (2008). Issues of stability and change in interest development. The Career Development Quarterly, 57, 51-62.
Tracey, T. J. G., & Ward, C. C. (1998). The structure of children's interests and competence perceptions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 290-303.
Watson, M., & McMahon, M. (2004). Children's career development: A metatheoretical
perspective. Australian Journal of Career Development, 13, 7-12.
Watson, M., & McMahon, M. (2005). Children's career development: A research review
from a learning perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 119-132.
83