Brown S.D., Lent R. (Editors). Career development and counseling: putting theory and research to work

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

136 I

NFORMATIVE

ESEARCH

• SEI codes reflect status expectations and ability estimates that can be used

in considering individual and societal constraints on choice (Hotchkiss &

Borow, 1996; Saltiel, 1988).

THEORIES

From a theoretical standpoint, the development, expression, and attainment of

educational and occupational aspirations and expectations can be explained by

several different theories covering psychological (Super’s self-concept develop-

ment theory), social psychological (Social Cognitive Career Theory; Gottfredson’s

theory of vocational aspirations development), and sociological (status attain-

ment theory) perspectives (Blau & Duncan, 1967; Fassinger, 1985; L. S. Gottfred-

son, 1981, 1996; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1996; Lent, Hackett, & Brown, 1996;

McNulty & Borgen, 1988; W. H. Sewell et al., 1969; Super, 1990; Super, Savickas, &

Super, 1996). Each of these theories is described in greater detail elsewhere in this

volume. Therefore, the purpose here is to highlight aspects of each theory that ex-

plain the development and role of aspirations in the career choice process.

SYCHOLOGICAL

HEORY

: S

UPER

’

ELF

-C

ONCEPT

EVELOPMENTAL

HEORY

Super’s (1990) developmental theory views career development as a series of

spe

cific vocational tasks that must be accomplished according to a defined and

predictable sequence—growth, exploration, establishment, maintenance, and dis-

engagement. A time of particular importance in developing and pursuing occu-

pational (and educational) aspirations is the exploration stage, which begins

around age 14 and is characterized by a progressive narrowing of career options,

from fantasizing about possible careers to identifying tentative options, to final

decisions about career choice. Super posited that self-concept plays a critical role

in career development. In fact, aspirations (career choices) are viewed as a repre-

sentation of an individual’s occupational self-concept. Occupational aspirations

can change over time, but they tend to become increasingly stable as adolescents

mature.

OCIAL

SYCHOLOGICAL

HEORIES

Social psychological theories of career behavior emphasize how culture, gender,

and life events interact with individual career preferences to determine career

aspirations and choice. Unlike psychological theories, which focus on individual

attributes like self-concept and role salience, social psychological theories focus

on ways that individual attributes are shaped by experiences and surroundings.

In this section, two theories—Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) and the the-

ory

of career circumscription and compromise—are reviewed.

Social Cognitive Career Theory SCCT incorporates self-efficacy, outcome expecta-

tions, and personal goals with other person, contextual, and learning factors to

explain academic and career choices and attainment (Lent, Brown, & Hackett,

1994, 1996). The self-efficacy construct (situation-specific estimates of an individ-

ual’s ability to successfully perform a task or behavior; Lent, Chapter 5, this vol-

ume; Lent & Hackett, 1987) is a central factor that influences career decisions and

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 136

Occupational Aspirations: Constructs, Meanings, and Application 137

helps “determine individuals’ willingness to initiate specific behaviors, their per-

sistence in the face of obstacles or barriers, and their level of competence in exe-

cuting the behaviors” (Arbona, 2000, p. 288). Career choice is a dynamic process

from the SCCT perspective, one that is being constantly modified by learning ex-

periences and performance outcomes (e.g., academic achievement), as well as

“how people read their capabilities and potential payoffs in view of continuous

performance feedback” (Lent, Hackett, et al., 1996, p. 11).

Bandura’s (1986) triadic relationship of personal attributes, environmental

fac

tors, and overt behavior explains how individuals actively shape their occupa-

tional interests and goals. Social Cognitive Career Theory adds to this explana-

tion by describing the smooth translation of academic- and career-related

interests into goal intentions and goals into action (Rottinghaus, Lindley, Green,

& Borgen, 2002; Swanson & Gore, 2000). While SCCT does not specifically ad-

dress the occupational aspirations construct, it most likely reflects goals (“What

type of work do you expect to do?”). Occupational aspirations stem partly from

an individual’s self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interests and can be im-

portant mediators of motivation and development.

SCCT also identifies other person and contextual influences on the general

cognitive processes involved in career choice (Lent, Chapter 5, this volume; Lent,

Brown, et al., 1996; Lent et al., 1994). For example, SCCT highlights the way that

inputs such as gender, race, and socioeconomic status “shape the learning oppor-

tunities to which particular individuals are exposed, the characteristic reactions

(e.g., support, discouragement) they receive for performing different activities,

and future

outcomes they anticipate” (Lent, Hackett, et al., 1996). Lent and his col-

leagues view

these variables as socially constructed and conferred aspects of ex-

perience that

tend to influence the availability of academic and occupational

opportunities. Self-

efficacy, outcome expectations, and aspirations (goals) are

influenced through

differential socialization patterns defined by gender or

race/ethnicity. Similarly, socioeconomic status influences occupational aspira-

tions in much the same way

as other person variables (i.e., through differential ac-

cess and exposure to skill and

efficacy-building experiences).

Finally, SCCT establishes strong ties between academic and career interests,

choices, and performance. Successive academic attainment provides access to

more advanced educational opportunities that, in turn, lead to more prestigious

occupational opportunities. Lent, Brown, et al. (1996) proposed that academic

int

erest and ability serve as feedback mechanisms that help shape future career

selection. Thus, both educational aspirations and educational performance influ-

ence an individual’s occupational behavior. This position not only reflects the

strong relationship between educational and occupational aspirations (Ma &

Wang, 2001; Mau & Bikos, 2000; Rojewski & Yang, 1997) but also provides some

explanation about why the relationship exists and how it influences career choice

and attainment.

Theory of Career Circumscription and Compromise L. S. Gottfredson’s (1981, 1996,

Chapter 4, this volume) theory explains the development of occupational aspira-

tions

from a social psychological perspective. Aspirations reflect an individual’s

occupational self-concept and are defined as the “joint product of assessments of

compatibility and accessibility. Aspirations are called expectations or realistic

as-

pirations when they are tempered by knowledge of obstacles and opportunities.

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 137

138 I

NFORMATIVE

ESEARCH

They are called idealistic aspirations when they are not” (1996, p. 187). The the-

ory outlines two processes in the longitudinal development of occupational aspi-

rations: compromise and circumscription. Compromise occurs as individuals give

up their ideal, albeit inaccessible, aspirations for more realistic and accessible

choices. These choices (1) occur within a developmental process, (2) are a reflec-

tion of occupational self-concept, and (3) lead to satisfaction when they fit with

occupational self-concept.

Circumscription is the process of narrowing (i.e., irreversibly eliminating) occu-

pational options by comparing self-image to images of possible occupations and

determining the level of compatibility between the two. This process begins in

early childhood and occurs in a series of four stages: size and power, sex roles, so-

cial valuation, and unique self (Armstrong & Crombie, 2000). The first stage oc-

curs between 3 and 5 years of age when children develop an orientation to size

and power. Stage 2 (6 to 8 years of age) focuses on determining appropriate sex

roles. Children use concrete, dichotomous thinking and rule out occupations

they deem inappropriate for their sex. Social status comes into play in Stage 3 (9

to 13 years of age) when occupational aspirations are ranked by prestige and so-

cial value. During this third stage, adolescents begin to identify ceiling (tolerable

effort boundary) and floor levels (tolerable level boundary) of appropriate occupa-

tional aspirations. Finally, in Stage 4, occurring at age 14 and beyond, individuals

are oriented toward their internal unique selves. L. S. Gottfredson (1981, 1996)

posited that when faced with the need to compromise occupational aspirations,

individuals follow a predictable path. Sex type (Stage 2) is least, prestige level

(Stage 3) more likely, and field of interest and personality (Stage 4) most likely to

be compromised. It is interesting that “most individuals will settle for a good

enough job rather than the best possible choice” (Swanson & Gore, 2000, p. 242).

Further research is required before definitive conclusions can be made about this

aspect of the theory (Vandiver & Bowman, 1996).

OCIOLOGICAL

HEORY

: S

TATUS

TTAINMENT

HEORY

Status attainment theory views occupational aspirations and choice from a socio-

logical perspective, asserting that social forces are more powerful in determining

occupational attainment than personal ones (Fitzgerald, Fassinger, & Betz, 1995;

Jencks, Crouse, & Muesser, 1983). Occupational aspirations and attainment reflect

the existing stratification of society and are determined by some combination of

bias and discrimination, social attitudes, cultural expectations, and stereotyped

experiences because of gender, race/ethnicity, or social class (Hotchkiss & Borow,

1996). Negative cultural perceptions or societal expectations may impose lower

status and a devalued role on some adolescents, particularly women, minorities,

and individuals from lower socioeconomic strata (Hellenga et al., 2002). This may,

in turn, result in limited career aspirations reflected by narrow, stereotypical em-

ployment possibilities.

Blau and Duncan (1967) first outlined the status attainment model, also known

as the classic model, in an attempt to explain occupational mobility in the United

States. They identified four variables of importance to understanding occupational

attainment, including antecedent variables (e.g., father’s educational attainment and

occupational status) and intervening variables (e.g., educational attainment and sta-

tus of first job). Initially, the model posited that the social status of an individual’s

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 138

Occupational Aspirations: Constructs, Meanings, and Application 139

parents affects the level of education attained, which, in turn, affects the occupa-

tional level achieved (Hotchkiss & Borow, 1996).

Sewell and his colleagues (W. H. Sewell et al., 1969; W. H. Sewell, Haller, &

Ohlendorf, 1970) refined the original model by incorporating elements of family

background and influences of significant others and by reemphasizing the criti-

cal role of education in attainment. Of these variables, individual aspirations,

significant others, and academic ability and performance are most important in

explaining occupational attainment. Aspirations are a central mechanism in de-

termining occupational attainment and are formed through social interaction.

Both occupational and educational aspirations are formed at an early age

through two feedback mechanisms: evaluations received from significant others

and self-assessment of potential based on academic performance (Knottnerus,

1987). Finally, studies using the status attainment framework (e.g., Alexander &

Eckland, 1975; Haller & Virkler, 1993; Jencks et al., 1983; Marjoribanks, 2002)

have demonstrated a consistent relationship between educational and occupa-

tional aspirations and achievement.

Status attainment theory has relied on a functionalist, socialization model to

explain lower occupational attainment of disadvantaged groups. However, the

model does not work as well with women, persons of color, or people with low so-

cioeconomic status as it does with White males (Alexander & Eckland, 1975;

Dunne, Elliott, & Carlsen, 1981; Hanson, 1994; Knottnerus, 1987). Several reasons

have been advanced to explain the limited predictive value of the status attain-

ment model for these groups. Hellenga et al. (2002) suggested:

[I]n an historically White- and male-dominated society, White men are “built into”

educational and vocational pathways; their vocational destination will be largely

dependent on where they start out—their parents’ education, their own socioeco-

nomic status, and abilities. However, for members of groups still overcoming

racism and sexism, personal qualities and environmental supports can make the

difference between perseverance and acquiescence, success and failure. (p. 210)

UMMARY OF

HEORETICAL

ERSPECTIVES AND

HEIR

OLE IN

NDERSTANDING

CCUPATIONAL

HOICE

The four theories reviewed here each present a somewhat different explanation of

what aspirations are, how they develop, and the specific role they play in the ca-

reer development process. While each theory offers certain advantages, no theory

is comprehensive enough to address all issues. Therefore, a collective perspective

may provide the best way to understand the complexity represented by occupa-

tional aspirations.

Super’s (1990; Super et al., 1996) developmental self-concept theory explains

aspirations from a developmental perspective and sees aspirations as a reflection

of occupational self-concept. Positioning aspirations within a developmental

framework is important, but Super’s theory does not integrate social and envi-

ronmental factors into its explanation, nor has much research focused on the

early development of aspirations (e.g., during the growth stage). L. S. Gottfred-

son’s (1981, 1996) theory of career circumscription and compromise also views as-

pirations as a reflection of occupational self-concept but extends this idea in several

directions. First, Gottfredson emphasizes the early development of aspirations

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 139

140 I

NFORMATIVE

ESEARCH

and suggests that individuals use aspirations as a reflection of social value in sex

type, prestige, and self-interest. To Super, aspirations are the implementation of

an individual’s psychological self (occupational self-concept) and reflect “succes-

sive approximations of a good match between the vocational self and the world of

work” (Swanson & Gore, 2000, p. 240). L. S. Gottfredson, however, sees aspira-

tions first as individuals’ attempt to place themselves in a broader social order

and only secondarily as the implementation of their psychological self. She also

posited that aspirations result largely from the elimination or rejection of options

rather than selection or expansion.

The SCCT espoused by Lent, Brown, et al. (1994, 1996) further emphasizes the

interaction of person and environment to explain aspirations. From this perspec-

tive, however, aspirations reflect self-efficacy beliefs and socialization patterns

based on external factors such as gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic sta-

tus, and the internalization of differential learning experiences. Another impor-

tant aspect of the SCCT is the strong relationship between academic and career

behavior. Lent and his colleagues emphasize both occupational and educational

aspirations, making a clear connection between academic ability and perfor-

mance and occupational attainment. Educational performance provides feedback

that shapes future educational and occupational behavior and choice. Like SCCT,

status attainment theory emphasizes social aspects of aspiration development

and the strong relationship between educational and occupational aspirations.

However, status attainment theory does not address the role of personal or psy-

chological aspects of career behavior such as self-concept or self-efficacy. Rather,

occupational aspirations and attainment are viewed within a broad system of

cial stratification. From this perspective, career goals are constrained by insti-

tutional and impersonal forces beyond individual control. Bias and barriers are

erected on the basis of external factors such as gender, race, and social class,

often limiting individuals’ career alternatives.

RESEARCH ON OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATIONS

The research summarized in this section supports each of the four theories dis-

cussed earlier in this chapter. For example, a psychological perspective is repre-

sented by the inclusion of constructs such as self-concept, self-esteem, and locus

of control. Social-psychological aspects of aspirations development emerge as in-

dividuals interact with significant others in their lives and environments, at

home and in school. The very close connection between educational and occupa-

tional aspirations is acknowledged. Status attainment theory recognizes how

academic achievement affects the opportunities made available or denied to in-

dividuals and, in turn, how school-based experiences influence educational and

occupational aspirations and attainment. Our understanding would be en-

hanced from future studies that focus on this connection.

Findings about three social demographic factors that have received attention

from all of the theoretical perspectives—gender, race or ethnicity, and socio-

economic status—are also summarized. SCCT acknowledges the role of these

background variables in providing context and shaping individual experience

and learning. Status attainment theory emphasizes how these factors affect the

social stratification process. According to a growing body of literature (e.g., L. S.

Gottfredson, 1996; Trice, 1991; Trice & McClellan, 1993; Trice, McClellan, &

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 140

Occupational Aspirations: Constructs, Meanings, and Application 141

Hughes, 1992), these demographic factors have a substantial and direct influence

on childhood aspirations, but become more indirect in their influence as mediat-

ing variables such as significant others and academic achievement become more

important in adolescence.

TABILITY

Currently available theory and research suggests that occupational aspirations are

formed in early childhood and that these aspirations tend to become increasingly

realistic and relatively stable over time (Armstrong & Crombie, 2000; Rojewski &

Ya ng, 1997; Trice & King, 1991; Trice & McClellan, 1993). The evidence supporting

these fundamental assertions was strong enough for Wahl and Blackhurst (2000)

to declare that our conventional wisdom about planning for college and setting

employment or lifestyle goals may be a case of offering too little, too late:

A review of theory and recent research related to educational and occupational as-

pirations reveals that important career development processes may occur well be-

fore adolescence. In fact, tentative college plans may be formed in early elementary

school with career preferences evident as early as kindergarten. (p. 3)

Evidence suggests that early career aspirations are heavily influenced by prevail-

ing gender and racial stereotypes (Sellers, Satcher, & Comas, 1999; Wahl & Black-

hurst, 2000).

Studies showing the stability of aspirations have looked at children as young as

5 and 6 years of age up through early adulthood. Trice (1991) asked 422 children,

either 8 or 11 years old, what they wanted to be when they grew up. Approximately

one-half of both 8- and 11-year-old respondents expressed stable aspirations in

interviews conducted eight months after initial data collection. Aspirations were

most often related to their parents’ careers and the careers of others in their

community.

Changes can and do occur with expressed occupational aspirations and at

times (e.g., during the career exploration stage) can occur rather frequently.

Nulty and Borgen (1988) found that students shifted their aspirations more

often between occupational fields at the same prestige level than moving up or

down within a particular field. Changes within similar prestige levels might

flect shifting aspirations from plumber to carpenter or from doctor to lawyer.

Less frequently, changes occur between prestige categories (Davey, 1993). Typi-

cally, when changes in prestige categories do occur, aspirations are raised to a

higher prestige category.

Baiyin Yang and I analyzed the occupational aspirations of students in the

NELS:88 database at Grades 8, 10, and 12, finding that occupational aspirations

were relatively established by the eighth grade and remained stable (in terms of

prestige level) from early to late adolescence (Rojewski & Yang, 1997). In a sepa-

rate study, I examined the stability of adolescents’ occupational aspirations be-

tween the 8th and 10th grades (Rojewski, 1997). Typically, adolescence is viewed

as a time when decisions about careers may frequently change because of explo-

ration activities and a growing sense of personal abilities, lifestyle needs, and

workplace requirements. However, just over half of the students I studied (52.9%)

held stable aspirations (for prestige level) from 8th to 10th grade. Females were

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 141

142 I

NFORMATIVE

ESEARCH

more likely to aspire to either high- (e.g., accountant, manager, teacher) or low-

prestige (e.g., service, machine operator, homemaker) occupations, while more

males aspired to moderate-prestige jobs (e.g., sales, trades, military, or protective

services). Forty-four percent of the sample reported different aspirations (in

terms of broad prestige level) at the two data points. These differences are poten-

tially important because they reflect very different education requirements for

entry-level positions, social status, and income. Changes in aspirations also re-

flect differing perceptions about an individual’s occupational self-concept and

acceptable social roles.

NFLUENCES

The development of occupational aspirations and expectations can be explained

by some combination of background variables, psychological factors, and socio-

logical or environmental influences (Farris, Boyd, & Shoffner, 1985; Fassinger,

1985; McNulty & Borgen, 1988). Factors such as gender (Davey & Stoppard,

1993), socioeconomic status and parents’ occupations (Hotchkiss & Borow, 1996;

McNair & Brown, 1983), self-concept (L. S. Gottfredson, 1981, 1996; Super, 1990;

Super et al., 1996), locus of control (Taylor, 1982), and educational aspirations

(Farmer, 1985; Mau, Domnick, & Ellsworth, 1995) have been identified as impor-

tant correlates of occupational aspirations development. Several of these factors

are briefly reviewed here.

Gender Research over a more than 30-year span has consistently shown gender

differences in occupational aspirations. In fact, Sellers et al. (1999) considered

gender-role stereotyping and its influence on occupational choice pervasive in our

society. Female adolescents are likely to express higher occupational aspirations

than their male peers. Male adolescents are more likely to aspire to moderate-

prest

ige occupations, while female adolescents are more likely to aspire to either

high- or low-prestige occupations (Apostal & Bilden, 1991; Betz & Fitzgerald,

1987; Davey & Stoppard, 1993; Dunne et al., 1981; Farris et al., 1985; G. D. Gottfred-

son & Holland, 1975; Haller & Virkler, 1993; Jenkins, 1989; Rojewski, 1996; Rojew-

ski & Yang, 1997). Despite higher aspirations, females tend to restrict their range

of potential occupations at an early age and are more likely than males to adjust

their narrower educational and occupational expectations downward over time

(Hanson, 1994; Wahl & Blackhurst, 2000). Looft (1971) used the term occupational

foreclosure to describe this process of range restriction in occupational aspirations.

These differences, coupled with lower occupational attainment for females,

have led some to conclude that gender is the single most powerful and persistent

influence on occupational development (L. S. Gottfredson, 1981, 1996; Hall, 1994).

Not only is the influence of gender powerful, it affects children at a relatively

young age. Various possibilities have been suggested to explain the differences

found between males and females, including possible gender bias in the socioe-

conomic index scales used to code occupations, rising wages in low-prestige jobs,

greater geographic restrictions on females, increasing occupational opportunities

for females in high-prestige careers, concerns about balancing career and family/

relationships, presence of children in the household, and marital and fertility

plans (Apostal & Bilden, 1991; Betz, 1993; Dunne et al., 1981; Fitzgerald et al.,

1995; Maxwell & Cumming, 1988).

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 142

Occupational Aspirations: Constructs, Meanings, and Application 143

Other explanations for gender differences in occupational aspirations have

also been proposed. For example, Davey and Stoppard (1993) found that females

hold a more flexible life role orientation (i.e., family and career salience) than do

males. This flexibility can explain the discrepancies often found among female

aspirations, expectations, and attainment. Astin (1984) explained that young

women might expect to pursue more traditionally female occupations than they

desire because they are perceived to be more accessible than male-dominated

cupations. Gender self-concept and the sex stereotyping of occupations, de-

scribed by L. S. Gottfredson (1996), among others, are other possible explanations

for observed gender differences. While it is true that both males and females are

affected by traditional gender-stereotyped thinking, outcomes usually favor

males in terms of job availability and income potential (Dunne et al., 1981). Given

that research consistently shows gender differences in occupational aspirations,

expectations, and attainment, there is little doubt that the career development

and status attainment process of women is more complex than for males (Betz,

1993; W. H. Sewell et al., 1970).

Gender has also been examined as a factor that can affect discrepancies be-

tween aspirations and expectations. Arbona and Novy (1991) reported on the oc-

cupational aspirations and expectations of Black, Mexican American, and White

college freshmen. Contrary to other studies, they found little difference in the de-

gree of discrepancy among college freshmen based on race or ethnicity. However,

gender was associated with statistically significant discrepancies in White and

Mexican American females, suggesting that these college women aspired to non-

traditional (and more prestigious) careers, but did not expect to be able to pursue

or attain them.

Davey and Stoppard (1993) also reported that one-third of the female high

school students they studied expected to have occupations that were more tradi-

tionally female than their most desired occupation. Further, they found that tra-

ditional female expectations, regardless of aspirations, were associated with a

perceived lack of support from significant others and concerns about the cost of

postsecondary education.

Race or Ethnicity While considerable progress has been made in understanding

gender influences on occupational aspirations, limited understanding exists

about race and ethnicity (Mau & Bikos, 2000). At present, the role of race and eth-

nicity in the development of occupational aspirations and expectations is often

viewed as being indirect in nature. For example, Super (1990) explained that race

and socioeconomic status influence career decision making and attainment by

opening or closing opportunities and shaping occupational- and self-concepts.

Lent et al. (1994) proposed that race and socioeconomic status affect career choice

options primarily through their impact on learning opportunities giving rise to

particular types of self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations. From a socio-

logical perspective, race is viewed as a stimulus variable that produces reactions

from others. The influence of these reactions is often internalized and acted on at

an early age (Hotchkiss & Borow, 1996).

The effects of both race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status are not easy to

disentangle from other variables (Osipow & Fitzgerald, 1996), resulting in a fair

amount of confusion about their respective roles in shaping occupational aspira-

tions. The study I coauthored with Yang (1997) offers some potential insight. We

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 143

144 I

NFORMATIVE

ESEARCH

initially hypothesized that gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status

would all have enduring effects on the development of occupational aspirations.

Instead, we found that when controlling for the effects of race/ethnicity (catego-

rized as a dichotomous variable, White/non-White) with socioeconomic status,

race/ethnicity had very minimal direct influence. In other words, socioeconomic

status moderated the effects of, and was more influential than, race/ethnicity on

aspirations.

Other studies of race and ethnicity influences reveal more mixed results, rang-

ing from no racial differences (Hauser & Anderson, 1991; Rotberg, Brown, &

Ware, 1987; Singer & Saldana, 2001; Thomas, 1976) to higher aspirations for

Whites than for racial and ethnic minorities (Bogie, 1976; Curry & Picou, 1971;

Hellenga et al., 2002), to higher aspirations for racial and ethnic minorities than

Whites (Dillard & Perrin, 1980; Wilson & Wilson, 1992). Arbona and Novy (1991)

found no overall differences in the Holland type of the occupational aspirations

of African American, Mexican American, and White participants. However,

when

examined by gender, more White and Mexican American men aspired to, and

pected to work in, realistic and investigative occupations than African Ameri-

can men, while a larger proportion of women than men aspired to, and expected

to work in, social and conventional occupations. Thus, gender-role stereotypes

seemed

o have greater influence on occupational expectations than aspirations

for African American and Mexican American groups.

Much of the work that has been done on racial influences has looked at African

American adolescents and adults. Reviewing this literature, Bowman (1995)

claimed that relatively little is known about how race affects the occupational as-

pirations of African Americans. What the research does show is a tendency for

African Americans to have lower aspirations and expectations than their White

counterparts (Hellenga et al., 2002; T. E. Sewell & Martin, 1976). Jacobs, Karen,

and McClelland (1991) reported moderate differences in aspirations by race.

White males were more likely to aspire to professional and managerial occupa-

tions, while African American males were more likely to aspire to lower prestige

jobs, such as craft and blue-collar occupations. However, it appears that education

level may be a moderating variable because when education was held constant,

there were no differences between the two groups.

Socioeconomic Status It is somewhat surprising that the influence of socio-

economic status on career aspirations has not received a great deal of attention

in career psychology (Osipow & Fitzgerald, 1996). Yet, despite limited and

sometimes contradictory findings (e.g., Rashmi, Kauppi, Lewko, & Urajnik, 2002;

Sellers et al., 1999), it seems that socioeconomic status does play some role, either

directly or indirectly, in determining occupational and educational aspirations

(e.g., Furlong & Cartmel, 1995; Holmes & Esses, 1988; Rojewski & Yang, 1997;

W. H. Sewell & Shah, 1968; Wahl & Blackhurst, 2000). Generally, research findings

indicate positive correlations between socioeconomic status and occupational as-

pirations: Individuals from higher socioeconomic status aspire to, expect, and at-

tain more education and more prestigious occupations than individuals from

lower class backgrounds.

Schoon and Parsons (2002), for example, found that family socioeconomic sta-

tus was related to later adult occupational attainment of children. However,

more important, they also found that this relationship could be explained by

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 144

Occupational Aspirations: Constructs, Meanings, and Application 145

educational aspirations and educational attainments during the school years.

That is, children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds did poorer in school

and had lower future educational aspirations than did children from higher

socioeconomic backgrounds. This, and not their socioeconomic background per

se, led them to end up as adults with less prestigious occupations (see also

Marjoribanks, 2002).

These are very important findings because they suggest that an individual’s

future occupational attainment is not an inevitable result of where he or she

grows up. Rather, the potential career-limiting influences of socioeconomic sta-

tus can be reduced by helping children growing up in such family backgrounds

to perform better in school and, as a result, develop higher levels of educational

aspirations for their future.

How else might socioeconomic status influence aspirations? Status attainment

theory studies, in particular, have emphasized how socioeconomic status pro-

vides a context for the development of occupational aspirations and attainment

(Hellenga et al., 2002; W. H. Sewell et al., 1969, 1970). Friesen (1986) maintained

that it is

necessary to understand both opportunity and process. In terms of op-

portunity, higher socioeconomic status brings greater access to the resources

needed to finance

education, provides special learning experiences, and offers

exposure to role models that have high prestige occupations. Conversely, socioe-

conomic status can also result in bias and structural barriers that negatively af-

fect the aspirations and expectations of those from lower socioeconomic status

backgrounds. Knottnerus (1987) explained the importance of social context:

Aspirations—the central mechanism in the process—are formed in social interaction.

Aspirations develop in response to the evaluations one receives from significant

oth-

ers and the self-assessment of one’s potential based on academic performance. As-

suming that status groups structure social interaction, the implications are that

significant others—for example, teachers and peers—tend to be drawn from socio-

economic positions somewhat similar to those of the youth’s parents and provide

encouragement from a similar value orientation....Thus, aspirations formed at an

early age shape educational and occupational attainments. (p. 116)

Other Influences In addition to gender, race, and socioeconomic status, a number

of other variables correlate with occupational aspirations, including personal and

psychological characteristics such as self-efficacy, self-esteem, self-concept, and

locus of control (Betz & Hackett, 1983; Fouad & Smith, 1996; Lent, Brown, &

Larkin, 1986); family variables such as parents’ expectations, education, and oc-

cupations (W. H. Sewell & Hauser, 1980; Singh et al., 1995; Wilson & Wilson,

1992); and school experiences such as academic achievement and ability (Brad-

dock & Dawkins, 1993; Hossler & Stage, 1992; Majoribanks, 1985; Mau & Bikos,

2000). The influence of significant others on both educational and occupational

aspirations has also received attention (Davey & Stoppard, 1993; Knottnerus,

1987; W. H. Sewell et al., 1970). The available literature supports the notion that

parents play a primary role in shaping their children’s occupational aspirations.

Steinberg, Dornbusch, and their colleagues, in particular, conducted a series of

investigations that demonstrate the powerful influence of home life on aspira-

tions and attainment. They found that parenting styles and parenting practices

c06.qxd 8/5/04 8:58 AM Page 145