Schools have done an inadequate job of preparing young people for work. Sixty percent of American adults believe high schools devote enough attention to preparing students for college, but NOT enough attention to helping students get jobs. Schools direct most of their resources toward preparing students for college. Yet only about 15% of incoming ninth graders go on to graduate from high school and then obtain a four-year college degree within six years of their high school graduation (Mora, 1993). Moreover, only 34% of students who left high school in 2002 were reported to possess the skills and qualifications necessary to attend college (Greene & Winters, 2005). Recent data citing unemployment rates for students with disabilities
underscore these concerns: Their unemployment rate has hovered around 70% for the last twelve years (National Council on Disability, 2000). College graduates with disabilities experience higher unemployment rates and longer job searches than do college students without disabilities, and they are more likely to be employed outside their chosen field than are their peers without disabilities.
In light of the above, it should not be surprising that the National Standards for School Counseling Programs (Campbell & Dahir, 1997) identified career development as an essential component of effective school counseling programs and recent legislation (e.g. the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act) assists schools in developing and implementing this important component. Changing demographics and cultural plurality have influenced the career development intervention process, as nonwhites, women, and immigrants begin to dominate the workforce. Many of these individuals face tremendous barriers to achieving satisfying careers, and are concentrated in low pay/low skill level jobs. Despite legislation to protect their rights, one-half of persons with disabilities are “outside the work structure” (Isaacson & Brown, 1997), and women and people of color continue to experience career-related difficulties.
Career development refers to the lifelong psychological, behavioral, and contextual influences shaping one’s career over the life span. It is beyond the scope of this chapter to review the multiple theories of career development (at least ten theories have been proposed and subjected to research), the various stages of career development, and the many career-related issues that confront individuals throughout the lifespan. The previous version of this chapter (Levinson & Brandt, 1997) focused on two of the most popular theories of career development-the theories of Holland (1992) and Super (1957). As such, these will not be repeated here. Instead, this chapter will focus on two of the more recent, and popular, theories: social cognitive career theory (Lent, Brown, and Hackett, 1996) and Linda Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise (Gottfredson, 1996). Following a brief review of these two theories, common perspectives on career development will be presented based upon a synthesis of the career development literature.
Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) (Lent, Brown, and Hackett, 1996) is based on the assumption that social cognitive factors play an important role in career development and career decision-making. SCCT draws heavily from Krumboltz’s (Mitchell & Krumboltz, 1996) learning theory of career counseling and from Bandura’s (1986) social learning theory. Specifically, SCCT highlights self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and personal goals. Self-efficacy beliefs are defined as people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances. Self-efficacy beliefs provide answers to questions pertaining to whether we can perform specific tasks (e.g. Can I write business letters?)Outcome expectations refer to desired consequences of a specific course of action. Personal goals pertain to the effort required to engage in an activity
The theory also emphasizes the interaction of environment, self-referent thought, and behavior, referred to as the triadic reciprocal interaction system. In this system four general factors are seen as influencing career decision making: genetic, environmental, instrumental and associative learning experiences, and task approach skills. These factors influence students’ beliefs about themselves and about the world. In essence, person inputs (e.g. predisposition, gender, and race) interact with contextual factors (e.g. culture, family) and learning experiences to influence self-referent thoughts, including self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and personal goals. In turn, these thoughts shape behavior. Likewise, both of these dimensions are influenced by, and influence, environmental factors (e.g. job opportunities, access to training) and “planned happenstance.” Planned happenstance is a conceptual framework that encourages clients to generate, recognize and take advantage of chance events. Several studies have demonstrated positive outcomes for SCCT-based interventions used with diverse client groups (Hackett & Byars, 1996). However, because SCCT is a relatively recent addition to the literature on career development, theory and research addressing the theory is still in its infancy.
Linda Gottfredson's Theory of Circumscription and Compromise
Gottfredson's (1996) theory offers a developmental, sociological perspective on career development that is focused on the types of compromises people make in formulating their occupational aspirations. Circumscription involves the process of eliminating unacceptable occupations based primarily on gender and social class. Compromise involves the process of modifying career choices due to limiting factors. Gottfredson proposes four stages of cognitive development:
Stage 1. Orientation to size and power (ages 3-5). Children orient themselves to differences in size and power between themselves and adults.
Stage 2. Orientation to sex roles (ages 6-8). Children develop their "tolerable sextype boundary." That is, they believe that certain jobs are only for boys, and others are only for girls.
Stage 3. Orientation to social valuation (ages 9-13). Children and early adolescents develop a zone of occupations as acceptable based on social class and ability level. In other words, they rule out careers they consider to be "beneath" them and those that are above the upper limit of effort and risk they are willing to take.
Stage 4. Orientation to internal, unique self (age 14 +). Adolescents, and adults, become more introspective and self-aware, establishing a self-identity or self-concept and related personal goals. Compromise occurs as preferred careers are eliminated due to external realities such as job opportunities.
Gottfredson (1996) highlights the importance of career education programs to promote systematic exploration of career choices. Research on the theory has not been extensive; however, her concepts describing boundaries and motivation related to choice and aspiration are noteworthy.
Common Themes Among Theories of Career Development
Several common themes can be found among the various theories of career development, including the two briefly discussed above. First, career development is commonly viewed as a lifelong process that is influenced by an interaction of environmental and genetic factors. Second, it is characterized by progression through a series of hierarchical stages, each associated with certain developmental tasks or objectives. At each stage the career development process entails a series of ongoing, interrelated decisions that individuals must make. These decisions influence the career development of the individual, and the decision-making process itself is influenced by vocational/career experiences. Third, personality development/traits assume an important role in career development/choice. Because different people possess different traits, and because different traits are required for success in different occupations, certain types of people are best suited for certain types of occupations. Lastly, feelings about oneself (self concept, self efficacy, etc) influence career development and choice.
In general, the operationalization of career choice problems is dependent upon the particular theoretical approach to which one subscribes. For example, according to Gottfredson, career choice difficulties may occur because of a premature narrowing of viable occupational alternatives. In contrast, from a social cognitive career theory perspective, students who have faulty self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations may experience career choice difficulties.
Moreover, career problems are as individual as each student, and it is beyond the purview of this chapter to address every possible presenting problem. However, career choice is recognized as a common problem in most theories and has garnered much attention in the career counseling literature. Among students this problem is seen in the unnecessary restriction of their occupational options (Gottfredson, 1996). This often is reflected in the following: (a) the student is unable to name one or more career options: (b) the student’s interests and abilities are inadequate for the chosen career; (c) the student is not satisfied with the alternatives; (d) the student has unnecessarily restricted alternatives; and (e) the student is unaware of career opportunities or unrealistic about obstacles for implementing their chosen occupation. In that these factors tend to focus on circumscription of career options as they relate to social class, gender, and intellectual assets, they place women, racial/ethnic minorities and students with disabilities at especially high risk for problems in career development.
Issues in the Career Development of Females
Two-thirds of the new entrants into the workforce between the late 1980s and 2000 were women (Niles & Harris-Bowlsbey, 2002). During this period, the total percentage of American women in the workforce increased from 51.5% to 61.1% (Niles & Harris-Bowlsbey, 2002). Results of a longitudinal study of adolescents suggest that during the first 7 years following high school, students’ expectations regarding their occupations at age 30 are highly unstable, females are more inconsistent in their expectations than are men, and family events (such as marriage and children) have a greater impact on occupational expectations and attainment among women than men. Collectively, these findings suggest that family and career issues are more interdependent for females than for males (Ridfuss, Cooksey, & Suttertin, 1999). In support of both Gottfredson’s stage development approach and social cognitive career theory, Helwig (2001) found that occupational aspirations form and develop among second to sixth grade students as their age advances, and they tend to be based on gender stereotypes which circumscribe career options for females at an early age. However, some evidence suggests that females tend to demonstrate higher levels of career maturity and career development knowledge, including knowledge about decision-making and the world of work, than do men (Ohler, Levinson, & Damiani, 1998). Factors associated with occupational and educational aspirations of school-aged children and adolescents include: continued sex differences, socioeconomic status, and parental expectations and supports, and that the latter is especially true for students of color. Adolescents who showed aspiration-expectation discrepancies made anticipatory compromises by shifting toward more realistic and accessible occupations (Armstrong & Crombie, 2000) as described by Gottfredson's theory of compromise.
Ethnic/Racial Issues
Cerain ethnic and social groups of students are at high risk for dropping out of school, particularly African-Americans and Hispanics of low socioeconomic status backgrounds (see School Completion, this volume). Many of these students also face stereotyping, discrimination, and environmental barriers. A number of factors contribute to these career-related problems. Some are ones that schools can impact, such as the scarcity of successful role models with similar backgrounds, limited expectations and aspirations, lack of ethnic identify and related self-efficacy, and limited opportunities to explore a wide range of careers.
As stated earlier, unemployment rates among working-age individuals with disabilities has hovered around 70% for the last twelve years (National Council on Disability, 2000). As a consequence, 29% of workers with a disability live in poverty as compared to 10% of workers without a disability (National Organization on Disability, 2000). To some extent unemployment and income limitations that characterize individuals with disabilities can be traced to elevated school dropout rates that also characterize this population . Further limiting their career development, individuals with disabilities are often subjected to low career expectations. For example, both parents and teachers of individuals with disabilities believe that counselors typically suggest fields other than science and engineering to students with disabilities (Alston & Hampton, 2000).
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA) required schools to develop a plan designed to assist students with disabilities make a successful transition from school to work and or postsecondary education and community living. The act required that transition services be identified and included in the student's individual education plan by age 14. The 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act now requires that services designed to assist students in making a successful transition from school to post school plans begin no later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child is 16 years of age. Regardless, schools are increasingly developing school-to-work transition programs to meet this federal requirement. This is consistent with research showing that work-related experiences are associated with higher career maturity (Ohler, Levinson, & Barker, 1996).
In order to prevent problems in the area of career development, schools must do a better job of planning, implementing and evaluating K-12 career education programs. Programs should be based on career development theory, with clear career-related objectives at each grade level. Comprehensive transdisciplinary vocational/career assessment (Levinson, 1993) should be included, designed to identify the extent to which individual students are meeting career development objectives in a manner consistent with career development theory. Students identified as not meeting objectives can then be identified and provided with interventions to assist them in career development. Interventions can be provided at the both the systems level or individual student level. Activities designed to facilitate acquisition of career-related objectives should occur both as part of (for all students) and outside of (for students needing additional assistance) regular education. Schools must also target populations for career services that are at high risk for career-related difficulties (women, minorities and individuals with disabilities). Though high risk students should be given special attention and consideration in the process, there is no evidence to suggest that these students would benefit from any specialized or unique career intervention. That is, interventions that work effectively for the general population of students are likely to work effectively for these groups of students and vice-versa. Lastly, schools must provide transition services designed to assist students in making a successful transition from high school to post-school life as part of a comprehensive K-12 career education program.
Schools have done an inadequate job of planning and implementing programs designed to address student’s career development needs. Many programs currently in operation have been hastily developed and developed in response to federal or state mandates. Moreover, they have had as their primary focus accountability and compliance rather than the identification and accommodation of individual student needs. For example, in response to the IDEA mandate that schools offer transition services to students with disabilities by age 14, many schools simply develop transition plans for students without any additional assessment or consideration of individual students needs and attach these plans to the students Individual Education Plan (IEP) in order to document compliance. Too often the transition plans translate into services that differ little from those provided to students without disabilities. Hence, to truly prevent career-related problems, schools must do a better job of planning, implementing, and evaluating career development programs. Additionally, they must ensure that students are afforded a comprehensive transdisciplinary vocational/career assessment so that career development needs are identified and individual interventions are designed to address individual needs.
Planning, Implementing, and Evaluating Career Development Programs
The first step in program development entails planning, which should begin with establishing a task force that adequately represents all school and community personnel likely to be involved in providing services. The task force first should conduct a needs assessment designed to identify school and community resources and services that can be utilized in the program and potential obstacles to successful provision of services. Next, a K-12 career development model should be developed that makes use of local resources. Formal interagency agreements between school and community agencies should be established that clearly identify: (a) services to be provided, (b) the agencies that will provide these services, (c) to which students services will be provided, and (d) when the services will be provided. Funding requirements also should be identified, and sources of funding secured, if necessary.
In the implementation phase, a K-12 program coordinator should be identified who oversees implementation of the program, and in conjunction with other involved personnel, develops a procedures manual, purchases equipment and materials, and trains and orients involved professionals. Next, the program should be pilot-tested, revised and fully implemented. In the final phase and after the program has been implemented for a predetermined period of time, the program should be evaluated and revised as necessary.
Vocational/Career Assessment
Assessment should meet the following criteria: (a) results should be viewed as one piece of data, along with student’s self-knowledge and intentionality, past educational experience, and best predictions about work demands of the future, (b) used less for prediction of options, and more for identifying new concepts of self, areas for growth, and new possibilities for exploration,
and in respect to prevention, (c) the student should be involved as an equal participant (that is, the student should assist in guiding the process and should be involved in offering his or her own interpretation of assessment results, be given an opportunity to add to or delete occupational options generated by the assessment, and so forth (Niles & Harris-Bowlsbey, 2002). The role of assessment in the early stages of career development helps prevent career decision-making problems in that it increases a student’s readiness for career decision-making.
Effective vocational/career assessment helps increase a student's understanding of themselves. Many school systems have established vocational assessment programs; they are often dual-level programs and involve a variety of school and community-based (adult service agencies) personnel. Thus, the term “transdisciplinary” has been applied to describe this type of vocational/career assessment model (Levinson, 2004). Level I assessments typically include measures of mental ability, academic achievement, motor coordination, personality, vocational interests, vocational aptitudes, vocational adaptive behavior,
and career maturity. These measures consist of paper-and-pencil tests, performance tests, interviews, and observations. Level 2 assessments may evaluate these same areas, but typically emphasize vocational adaptive behavior, vocational interests, and vocational aptitudes. These measures tend to consist of more expensive and time-consuming techniques such as work samples and real and simulated work experiences. (For more information on both planning of programs and vocational and career assessment, readers are referred to Levinson [2002a]).
Alternative Actions for Intervention
In this section, two levels of intervention for career development are reviewed: systems-level interventions and individual-level interventions.
Systems Level Interventions
System level interventions are designed to be part of a K-12 regular education program and afforded to all students. Career education and school-to-work transition programs are examples of systems level interventions.
Career education. Career education is the systematic attempt to influence the career development of students through various types of educational strategies, including providing occupational information, infusing career-related concepts into the academic curriculum, offering various worksite-based experiences, and offering career planning courses (Isaacson & Brown, 1997). Comprehensive career guidance programs that are an integral part of the school’s educational program and enhance student development should be provided to all students. Unfortunately, many school districts do not provide such programs in a systematic and coordinated fashion, but rather in a haphazard and piecemeal fashion.
Developing a systematic and coordinated career development program requires the understanding of the developmental tasks confronting students in grades K–12. Understanding the tasks that students deal with at all levels of schooling prepares school personnel to work collaboratively in program development and implementation. The specific career development competencies identified as appropriate for elementary children are self-knowledge (e.g. importance of self-concept), educational and occupational exploration (e.g. awareness of the relationship between work and learning), and career planning (e.g. awareness of different occupations and changing male/female roles) (National Occupational Information Coordinating Council, 1992). Students who do not succeed at accomplishing the career development tasks they encounter in elementary school are likely to be at risk for even more difficulty when they encounter career development tasks presented to them during secondary school (Super, 1957). As such, it is a fallacy to believe the career development or transition services are programs that are only appropriate for middle school or high school students.
Career education programs operate in many schools and are designed to assist students to achieve the aforementioned career competencies. Such programs usually follow a model similar to that depicted in Figure 1, and are based on normal career development theory. The activities and experiences that make up career education programs usually include career assessment, career counseling, and the provision of educational and occupational information. These programs are usually integrated into the regular education curriculum, and are implemented by a variety of school personnel. Life career planning should begin in elementary school through such strategies as school wide career days, career education classes, and incorporation of discussion of career development issues into the classroom. The underpinnings of planning programs should involve the developmental implications involving gender, parental influence, socioeconomic status, school experiences and self-efficacy.
A meta-analysis of studies of K-12 career development programs and career education interventions concluded that moderate, positive outcomes (i.e. improved levels of career maturity) were present across studies (Baker & Popowicz, 1983). Several interventions designed to enhance self-efficacy and career confidence have been demonstrated to be empirically effective. Examples include career education classes, group counseling sessions based on self-efficacy information, small group career exploration and planning sessions, and computerized assessment/individual career counseling (McWhirter, Rasheed & Crothers, 2000). In fact, some authors have suggested that career education should form the basis for K-12 education and that all instruction should be linked to career development objectives to make instruction more relevant to students.
School-to-Work Transition Programs. As stated earlier, recent federal legislation has provided the impetus for the development of school-to-work transition programs. Unfortunately, many of these programs are designed to service only students with disabilities, focus solely on employment as a goal, and are not made available to students until age 14 or later. Our current knowledge of career development clearly suggests that transition services should incorporate a process rather than a single event or series of events. That is, rather than conceptualizing transition planning as a separate process that is initiated at age 14 (or age 16 as is now required by law), transition planning should be considered a natural part of the lifelong process of career development and career planning and be embedded within a K-12 career education program. The knowledge and skills individuals need in order to make a successful transition from school to work and community living actually begin to develop at birth, and continue throughout the lifespan. Hence, issues like understanding oneself and getting along with others, which should be addressed as early as the elementary school years, will ultimately effect transition from school to work. Planning for a student's successful transition actually begins in elementary school and continues throughout their educational career. Transition planning, therefore, should be understood to be an ongoing process that is inextricably linked to career development and begins the moment a student sets foot in school (Levinson, 2004).
Ongoing career development and transition programs are particularly important for students with disabilities, and should ensure the following (Levinson, 2004):
Additionally, transition programs need to shift from the traditional practice of intervening on the individual level to focusing on the systemic level to promote change and to understand students’ transition from school to work to life. Specifically, such programs should include work-based learning activities, adult world orientation, and support from adults taking into account the diverse background of students.
As students progress though the career education activities afforded them in regular education and are subjected to an ongoing vocational/career assessment, professionals should identify students who are not sufficiently profiting from these activities and/or are not meeting career development objectives in a timely manner. For these students, individual career development activities, designed to supplement what occurs in a K-12 career education program, must be developed. Career development interventions, defined broadly, involve any activity that empowers students to cope effectively with career development tasks. Generally, research has suggested that career interventions have positive effects, and there is no consistent body of literature that suggests that any one intervention is more effective than any other (Savickas, 1989). More research is needed to determine which interventions seem to be most effective for whom and under what circumstances (Luzzo & MacGregor, 2001). All interventions should have the purpose of facilitating one or more of the following, each of which is critical to mature career decision-making (National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee, 1992): increasing self-awareness, increasing educational and occupational awareness, improving decision making skills, and facilitating job readiness and placement. In addition, Levinson (2002b) suggests that individual interventions should focus upon providing accommodations needed for success, the teaching of advocacy skills, and offering activities designed to improve self efficacy. Some specific activities, as described by
Sample Career Development Activities for Elementary School Students
Self-knowledge. The objective of an activity entitled "What is a friend?" is to determine valued attributes in a friend. Students would either list individually or discuss in small groups the definitions of friendship, and what personal attributes describe a friend.
Educational and occupational exploration. For the activity “ABC List of Occupations," students list as many occupations as they can think of alphabetically and what they require from a worker. Students then discuss energy required versus pay, which jobs earn the most money, etc. Students will learn about the importance of knowing about jobs and job requirements, and how personal preferences influence our opinions about jobs.
Career planning. Students list school subjects, such as math, science, and music on the chalkboard, and divide into small groups to list occupations that require the knowledge of that subject (e.g. math for accounting) in order to reinforce the connection between school and work.
Sample Career Development Activities for Middle School/Junior and High school Students
Self-knowledge. Students record in a journal how they spend their out-of-school time over the course of one week. They then rate their enjoyment of each activity. By focusing on those activities they like most, students can clarify those that they should incorporate into their career plans.
Educational and occupational exploration. Students interview workers who enjoy their jobs and are good at them in order to identify training requirements, working conditions, specific responsibilities, etc. Students then review their responses and share them with a group, and respond to the following question: "This job would or would not (select one) be a good match for me because..." Additionally, the following activities can be useful to increase occupational awareness: structured site visits, shadowing, simulated site visits, simulated work samples, vocationally related classroom experiences, academic classroom experiences, and visits to work settings.
Career planning. Students collect and document their coursework, activities, career exploration, special awards, transition plan, goal statements, and contacts in an educational and career portfolio beginning as early as middle school in preparation for continued education or work.
Many students are at risk for career-related difficulties. In particular, female students, minorities, and individuals with disabilities experience the highest risk of experiencing career-related problems. In order to prevent problems in the area of career development, schools must develop K-12 career education programs which, based on career development theory, establish clear career-related objectives at each grade level. Activities designed to facilitate acquisition of these objectives must be an established part of the regular education curriculum. Schools must target populations that are at high risk for career-related difficulties (women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities), and must incorporate a multi-level vocational/career assessment program to determine the extent to which students are mastering objectives in a timely manner, and to plan individual and/or group interventions for students who are not mastering these objectives. Lastly, schools must provide transition services designed to assist students in making a successful transition from high school to post-school life as part of a comprehensive K-12 career education program. Perhaps most importantly, though, educators must provide the same level of emphasis and the same level of commitment and resources to planning and developing programs to meeting the career development needs of the job-bound majority as they do the college-bound minority. In addition, schools need to focus on the development of programs that are truly oriented toward identifying and meeting student needs rather than meeting needs for accountability and statutory compliance. Until this fundamental shift in educational priorities occurs, we are unlikely to see a dramatic shift in career development outcomes among students, particularly those students who are at the greatest risk of experiencing career-related problems.
By: Dr. Edward M. Levinson, Indiana University of PA and Dr. Denise L. Ohler, Edinboro University of PA
Alston, R.J., &
Armstrong, P.I., & Crombie, G. (2000). Compromises in adolescents’ occupational aspirations and expectations from grades 8 to 10. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 82-98.
Baker, S.B. & Popowicz, C.L. (1983). Meta-analysis as a strategy for evaluating effects of career education interventions. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 31, 178-186.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Gottfredson, L. S. (1996). Gottfedson’s theory of circumscription and compromise. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Assoc. (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed., pp. 179-232).
Greene, J.P. & Winters, M.A. (2005). Public high school graduation and college-readiness rates: 1991-2002. Retrieved
Hackett, G., & Byars, A. (1996). Social cognitive theory and career development of African American women. Career Development Quarterly, 44, 322-340.
Helwig, A.A. (2001). A test of Gottfredson’s theory using a ten-year longitudinal study. Journal of Career Development, 27, 77-95.
Holland, J. L. (1992). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (2nd ed.).
Isaacson, L.E., & Brown, D. (1997). Career information, career counseling, and career development.
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D., & Hackett, G. (1996). Career development from a social cognitive perspective. In D. Brow, L. Brooks, & Assoc. (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed., pp. 373-416).
Levinson, E.M. (2004). Introduction to transition assessment. In E.M. Levinson (Ed.) Transition from school to post-school life for individuals with disabilities: Assessment from an educational and school psychological perspective.
Levinson, E.M. (2002a). Best practices in school-based vocational assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.) Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 1569-1584).
Levinson, E.M. (2002b). Career development interventions for young adults with disabilities. In
Levinson, E.M. & Brandt, J. (1997). Career development. In G. Bear, K. & Minke, & A Thomas (Eds.) Children’s needs: Psychological perspectives II.
Levinson, E.M. (1993). Transdisciplinary vocational assessment: Issues in school-based programs.
Luzzo, D.A., & MacGregor, M.W. (2001). Practice and research in career counseling and development-2000. Career Development Quarterly, 50, 98-139.
McWhirter, E.H., Rasheed, S., & Crothers, M. (2000). The effects of high schoool career education on social -cognitive variables. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 330-341.
Mitchell, L. K., & Krumboltz, J. D. (1996). Krumboltz’s learning theory of career choice counseling. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Assoc. (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed., pp.233-276).
Morra, L.G. (1993). Transition from school to work: H.R. 2884 addresses components of comprehensive strategy (GAO/HRD-93-32) (Testimony before the Committee on Education and
National Council on Disability. (2000). National disability policy: A progress report,
National Occupational Information Coordinating
National Organization on Disability (2002). Executive Summary: 2000 N.O.D./Harris Survey of Americans with Disabilities. Retrieved
Ohler, D.L., Levinson, E.M., & Barker, W.F. (1996). Career maturity in college students with and without learning disabilities. Career Development Quarterly, 44, (3), 278-288.
Ohler, D.L., Levinson, E.M., & Damiani, V.B. (1998). Gender, disability and career maturity among college students. Special Services in the Schools, 13, (1/2), 149-161.
Ridfuss, R. R., Cooksey, E. C., & Suttetin, L. S. (1999).Young adult occupational achievement: Early expectation versus behavioral reality. Work and Occupations, 26, 220-263.
Savickas, M.L. (1989). Annual review: Practice and research in career counseling and development, 1988. Career Development Quarterly, 38(2), 100-134.
