Week 2

After this week’s readings, in conjunction with class discussion, I have learned a great deal about career counseling theory and best practices for working with children to discover their suitable career niche.

While Super’s theory is very applicable, I enjoyed the emphasis Gottfredson’s theory placed on gender and the orientation (feminine or masculine) of the occupation. In addition, Gibson’s article summarized the need for assessment of skills and family career history to better project and understand where a person’s skills might be well-suited. In class we discussed the relevancy of genograms and that is now understood.  

It is logical that career development should happen over the course of a person’s life and should take the environment into consideration (Gibson, 2005). The genograms seem so significant in helping children understand the “big picture.” For example, I created a family tree (what seems like eons ago) but I only understood the assignment at face value: I inserted information and received a grade. I never saw the theoretical importance that the family tree was insight into education, socio-economic status and gender roles. Fascinating!

While the readings and class discussion were interconnected, the piece of data that I chose to focus on is the environmental impact of career placement. In Gottfredson’s developmental stage, “Orientation to sex roles,” children are learning what is “acceptable for women and men” (Brown, 2012). If I think back to my childhood, I was often asked what I would do when “I grew up.” I mainly took the interests of my older sibling and projected them as my own. I also experienced Super’s exploratory stage as I learned about new interests and careers (Brown, 2012). When I view my mother, who worked very part time while I was young but was primarily a “stay at home” mom, it’s interesting to me that I never had a desire to hold that position. In addition, my father, who was a teacher when I was young, was not in a profession I was intrigued by. What’s captivating about this is that both roles are classified as feminine and yet I had no schema that there was such a classification (at least to a certain age).

Now that I look at the most critical times in development, in reference to gender roles, I realize how our society does a poor job of shaping children’s minds – ages 3-5 and 6-8 (Brown, 2012). I recently went into a toy store that had copious amounts of educational toys, creative toys, interactive toys, etc. There was ONE that was not gender specific. There was not one boy that was pictured next to a baby doll, pony, or anything pink and purple. Conversely, girls didn't have tools, they had makeup. Girls also didn't have building blocks, they had baby dolls. (The majority of these toys were relating to some form of a career or job.) As more and more women work in a processional environment, I wonder what (if anything) will change in the toy making realm (e.g., can’t girls me encouraged to have doctor kits? Can’t boys be good parents and teachers?). Food for thought.

Brown, D. (2012). Trait-and-Factor and Developmental Theories of Career Choice and Development and their Applications. In Career Information, Career Counseling, and Career Development (10th ed., pp. 2-23). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Gibson, D. M. (2005). The Use of Genograms in Career Counseling with Elementary, Middle, and High School Students. The Career Development Quarterly, 53, 353-362