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

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

336 A

SSESSMENT AND

CCUPATIONAL

NFORMATION

often assess addi

tional work-relevant abilities (e.g., social, leadership) in addition

to the PMAs. Table 14.1 provides an overview of the number of subtests measuring

the PMAs, psychomotor, and other or technical ability categories in selected ability

assessment instruments. More specific (e.g., subtest) information about these in-

struments is provided later in the chapter.

STABILITY OF WORK-RELEVANT ABILITIES

Cognitive abilities (especially more general versus specific abilities) are considered

to be rather stable over time (Carroll, 1993; Schaie & Hertzog, 1986; see also Gott-

fredson, 2003). Research also suggests that the structure of cognitive abilities and

an individual’s standing relative to peers on abilities tends to reach a fairly high

level of stability by early adolescence (Carroll, 1993; Dawis, Goldman, & Sung, 1992;

Dixon, Kramer, & Baltes, 1985), though there is room at that age and beyond for

further cognitive change (Dixon et al., 1985). Taken together, the consensus seems

to be that there is more room for malleability in the more specific and fine-tuned

abilities than at the more general level. Gottfredson (2003) presented an incisive

summary of these findings and incorporated them into a useful framework for de-

termining which cognitive abilities should be considered in career exploration and

guidance, as well as how they might be considered. In so doing, she suggests that

because the broader abilities represented by Strata II and III in Carroll’s model are

more stable and nonmalleable than Carroll’s specific Stratum I abilities, a sound

Table 14.1

Number of Subtests Measuring Ability Categories in

Selected Ability Assessment Instruments

Self-Estimated Objectively Estimated

Ability CDM-R Ability BAB

Category 2000 IWRA ASVAB Profiler DAT CAPS (Classic)

Reasoning 0 0 0

Spatial 2 2 1 1 2 2 2

Numerical 2 1 3 2 1 1 2

Verbal 1 2 2 1 2 2 1

Memory 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Creativity 2 2 0 0 0 0 2

Perceptual Speed 1 1 1 2

11 1

Psychomotor 1 1 0 3 0 1 3

Other or Technical 5 6 3 0 0 0 1

Note: ASVAB = Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery; BAB = Ball Aptitude Battery; CAPS =

Career Ability Placement Survey; CDM-R 2000 = Harrington-O’Shea Career Decision-Making Sys-

tem Revised-2000; DAT = Differential Aptitude Test; IWRA = Inventory of Work-Relevant Abilities.

Rows represent broad ability categories; tests within rows are similar in purpose and content to vary-

ing degrees. Mechanical comprehension, mechanical reasoning, and technical/mechanical tests ap-

pear under Spatial. Word fluency and artistic (e.g., musical) tests appear under Creativity. Reading,

language usage, word knowledge, paragraph comprehension, and spelling tests appear under Ver-

bal. Ver bal reasoning test(s) appear under Reasoning. Scientific or general science tests appear

under Other or Technical, as do social/meeting people tests.

Mathematical reasoning and arithmetic reasoning tests appear under Numerical.

Form Perception appears under Perceptual Speed.

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 336

Ability Assessment in Career Counseling 337

approach in working with career clients is to help them consider and explore a list

of best-bet career options that are a good match on the broader abilities and then

help them to fine-tune such choices on the basis of specific Stratum I abilities that

are already possessed by the client or that might be more easily trained due to the

increased malleability associated with them.

The Seattle Longitudinal Study (SLS; Schaie, 1994; Schaie & Hertzog, 1986)

examined specific ability changes over time among adults. This program of re-

search involved the assessment of mental abilities in more than 5,000 adults over

a period of some 35 years. Schaie (1994) summarized this research, reporting

modest in

creases from young adulthood to age 60 in inductive reasoning, spatial

orientation, verbal ability, and verbal memory, and notable declines during this

age period in numeric skill and perceptual speed. Between the ages of 25 and 88,

declines were found in inductive reasoning, verbal memory, spatial orientation,

numeric ability, and perceptual speed. Schaie (1994) also reported that while reli-

able average decreases are found for all abilities by age 67, the decline is modest

until the 80s, and it occurs for most individuals in a stair-step (rather than linear)

fashion. Furthermore, Schaie (1994) noted that much of the observed late-life de-

cline in abilities is attributable to the slowing of processing and response speed and

that when age changes in perceptual speed are removed from the other abilities,

their amount of age decline is significantly reduced. Variables identified through

the SLS to reduce the risk of cognitive decline in old age include the absence of car-

diovascular or other chronic diseases, favorable environmental circumstances such

as those associated with a high SES, extensive involvement in complex and intellec-

tually stimulating activities, a flexible personality style, and higher life satisfac-

tion (Schaie, 1994).

Taken together, it seems that while there is malleability in some more specific

abilities, individuals over time tend to hold a similar standing on tests of ability

relative to an age cohort (Carroll, 1993; Schaie, 1994). Although some practitioners

may be disappointed that abilities are not more malleable, the demonstrable sta-

bility of abilities has a decided advantage for career counseling—ability assess-

ments can be used to forecast into the future the types of work experiences and

jobs in which an individual might be successful, since ability levels assessed at

one time are likely to be present in the future as well. Thus, we can be reasonably

comfortable that knowledge about abilities can be used in educational and career

decision making from adolescence through adulthood.

INCORPORATING ABILITY ASSESSMENT

INTO CAREER COUNSELING

Several factors warrant consideration when using ability assessment in career

counseling. They include assessor training, criteria for evaluating ability assess-

ment instruments, ways to apply ability assessment to specific career concerns,

and the consideration of sex, ethnicity, and disability factors in ability assessment.

We discuss each of these matters in turn.

SSESSOR

RAINING

Users of psychological tests (be they tests of ability or other constructs) require

formal training in psychological measurement and assessment, in addition to

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 337

338 A

SSESSMENT AND

CCUPATIONAL

NFORMATION

train

ing and experience with the specific instruments they plan to employ. Asses-

sors need also to understand and comply with the information and guidelines set

forth in the manuals that accompany tests and be knowledgeable as to existing

guidelines and criteria for the responsible and ethical use of assessment instru-

ments (e.g., American Educational Research Association [AERA], American Psy-

chological Association [APA], & National Council on Measurement in Education

[NCME], 1999). Kapes and Whitfield (2001) have a handy appendix containing

codes and standards for psychological test use.

Garfield and Krieshok (2001) provide a useful checklist for counselors to eval-

uate their basic assessment and counseling competencies. The three domains

tapped by this checklist are:

1. Counseling skills (e.g., rapport establishment, sensitivity to diversity,

knowledge of career theories).

2. Assessment skills (e.g., knowledge of statistics used in testing and test

manuals, knowledge of types of assessment instruments, knowledge of

score-reporting procedures, knowledge of standardization, reliability, and

validity).

3. Responsibilities/competencies (preparing for test use, administration and

scoring, and test interpretation).

VALUATING

BILITY

SSESSMENT

NSTRUMENTS

Lowman (1991) highlights six useful criteria for career counselors to use in the

selection of ability measures:

1. Validity (e.g., Is there convincing support for the construct and predictive

validity of the ability?).

2. Reliability (e.g., Does the test measure the ability consistently?).

3. Norms (e.g., How recent, extensive, and age-appropriate are the normative

data for the measure?).

4. Commercial availability (i.e., Is the test readily available?).

5. Clarity of measurement (e.g., Is it clear which ability constructs or subcon-

structs are being measured by the test?).

6. Occupational applications (e.g., Are the proposed occupational applications

clear and compelling, and does the test show a differential validity pattern

for a variety of occupational groups?).

To this list, we add comprehensiveness, ease of administration and scoring, and

usefulness of the resultant report. A brief overview of these three factors follows.

Comprehensiveness An ability assessment instrument to be used in career coun-

seling should be evaluated for its comprehensiveness (i.e., the diversity of abilities

that is measured). The measurement of a diverse set of abilities is desirable be-

cause a good match between a person and an occupation depends on a thoughtful

consideration of the multidimensional natures of people and work. The optimal

level of comprehensiveness is something that the counselor must decide on a case-

by-case basis. Lowman (1991) provides a useful conceptual background on abili-

ties and their use in career assessment and counseling, as well as a thought

ful

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 338

Ability Assessment in Career Counseling 339

discussion of various issues associated with the measurement of abilities. In so

doing, he focuses on occupationally relevant ability variables, integrates relevant

literature in his explanation of each ability construct, and cites commercially

available measures of each. In addition, Fleishman and Reilly (1992) provide an

accessible and informative description of 52 different abilities that highlights the

job tasks and titles that call on each ability. This resource also provides a sam-

pling of tests for each. However, both Lowman (1991) and Fleishman and Reilly

(1992) tend to focus on the specific-ability level (rather than the multiple-ability

level) in their discussions of ability construct and measurement issues.

Ease of Administration and Scoring and Usefulness of Report Computer administra-

tion or self-administration via audio CD is becoming an option for the career

practitioner who does not have time for test administration. Furthermore, the re-

sultant test report should, at a minimum, include an ability profile along with ex-

amples of occupations that make use of the abilities or the overall ability profile.

Better still is a report that integrates ability and interest data and that uses these

data to make career recommendations. Some reports also include interpretive sec-

tions that help the client understand the implications of scores and score profiles

for career choice and work adjustment.

PPLYING

BILITY

SSESSMENT TO

PECIFIC

AREER

ONCERNS

Ability assessment can be effectively employed to address a wide array of career

counseling concerns. We highlight four: expanding career options, narrowing op-

tions, confirming a career choice, and enhancing job performance.

Expanding Options For the client with too few career options, ability assessment

can help generate a broad array of realistic recommendations. When working with

such clients, it may seem logical to first consider a set of occupations on the basis of

interests and then find a subset of occupations that fall into a realistic ability range

for the individual. While many interest areas offer a multitude of occupations that

are differentiated on the basis of the aptitudes required of them, a disadvantage of

such an approach is that the client may not have yet had the opportunity to develop

interest in an occupational area due to limited exposure to the world of work, inac-

curate outcome expectations, or the erroneous belief that he or she does not have

the required aptitude(s) (see Brown & Lent, 1996; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). As

such, occupational areas with the potential to be a good fit with both interests and

abilities may not be fully considered. Ability assessment can, therefore, be used

to identify a variety of congruent occupational titles, work groups, or activities

that can be subsequently narrowed on the basis of interests, values, and other

tivations.

Narrowing Options For the client with a need to narrow a set of career options,

ability assessment can be used to identify a subset of alternatives that plays to par-

ticular strengths the person currently has or that requires skills that the individ-

ual is likely to acquire quickly and easily. Such positions would offer a higher

likelihood of success than positions chosen on the basis of other factors. This sub-

set of occupations can be further narrowed in light of other important characteris-

tics (e.g., interests, values, personality).

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 339

340 A

SSESSMENT AND

CCUPATIONAL

NFORMATION

Confirming a Career Choice For individuals seeking to confirm a career choice,

both multiple and specific ability assessment can be employed in a more fine-

tuned way by discussing the results in the context of the educational, training, and

job requirements of the career in question. This can serve as powerful information

in confirming a client’s choice. It can also promote important discussions about

motivation and choice realism. For instance, if it appears as though there is con-

gruence in the approximate level of the occupation (in terms of training require-

ments and cognitive complexity) but there is a mismatch between the abilities of

the individual and the abilities required of the career in question, two things

should be kept in mind. First, while self-ratings of ability are clearly estimates of

ability, so are objective ability assessments. Such tools are fallible and subject to

measurement error, including error associated with conditions such as fatigue,

preoccupation, lack of motivation, or lack of familiarity with such tests. For these

reasons and others (there are many variables in addition to ability that directly af-

fect career success), objective assessment results should always be corroborated

with other materials (e.g., self-reports, school grades), and career clients should

never be left with the impression that “the tests say that I cannot do what I want to

do.” Furthermore, if the majority (or entirety) of a client’s self-estimated abilities

are in the low range, there is an opening to discuss the possibility of ability under-

estimation. Second, should the mismatched (objective or self-estimated) ability

sults be corroborated, it is critical to discuss issues of effort, motivation, oppor-

tunity, and supports concerning the development of the requisite skills. If the mis-

match occurs in abilities that are not as amenable to training or education (e.g.,

spatial abilities), it is important to convey to the client that the results suggest that

he or she may need to work longer and harder than coworkers to achieve the same

level of performance, and, realistically, there may be some work tasks that may

never be mastered at a peak level of performance.

Gottfredson (2003) states that while already-mature individuals cannot expect

to increase their broad abilities, there are other proactive ways to increase com-

petitiveness in a desired field, including emphasizing relevant noncognitive traits

such as conscientiousness or integrity, as well as developing necessary knowledge

areas and skills (Gottfredson’s examples include learning a computer program,

finding a tutor or mentor, and preparing more fully for interviews). According to

Gottfredson, these noncognitive attributes will not substitute for the needed cog-

nitive abilities, but they could make the difference when broad abilities are near

the margin for what is required.

Enhancing Work Performance Finally, for the client seeking to enhance perfor-

mance on the job, ability assessment can be used to help identify possible reasons

for current difficulty on the job. For example, a low score in one of the speed and

accuracy or memory aptitudes (i.e., clerical, writing speed, associative memory,

and auditory memory span) can sometimes provide an explanation for an other-

wise puzzling difficulty in completing job training or certain job tasks. Once

identified, certain compensation strategies can be taught (e.g., taking extra time

to attend to detail, having others double-check your work, learning how to use

shorthand and/or mnemonic strategies). Furthermore, ability assessment can be

used to identify areas of currently untapped potential (e.g., creativity, reasoning,

mathematical, spatial) that can be explored and capitalized on in the workplace.

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 340

Ability Assessment in Career Counseling 341

ONSIDERING

, E

THNICITY

AND

ISABILITY

ACTORS IN

BILITY

SSESSMENT

Counselors need to be sensitive to the ways in which characteristics such as age,

sex, ethnicity, linguistic background, and educational and work history might af-

fect an individual’s response to career assessment and feedback. Counselors are

also encouraged to use ability results to identify relative strengths and weak-

nesses within the individual rather than comparing one individual to another or

one group to another. Although there are some small but consistent between-

group differences in test score means on some (but not all) ability subtests, there

are always substantial within-group differences. You cannot make meaningful or

responsible generalizations from the group to the individual (Neisser et al., 1996).

We next provide a brief overview of group-based findings in ability assessment

research.

Sex The overall equivalence that has been found between the sexes on intelli-

gence measures does not imply equal performance on every individual ability; in

fact, large differences favoring males appear in visual-spatial tasks such as men-

tal rotation and spatiotemporal tasks such as tracking a moving object through

space, while females tend to score significantly higher than males on tests of

some verbal abilities including synonym generation and verbal fluency (Neisser

et al., 1996). Furthermore, there is consistent evidence of sex differences on some

quantitative abilities, with females scoring higher on quantitative tasks in the

early years of school and with this trend reversing before puberty and males

demonstrating superior performance into old age (Neisser et al., 1996). Further,

while women tend to score higher on tasks including fine motor skills and per-

ceptual speed, men tend to score higher on tasks including spatiotemporal re-

sponding and fluid reasoning (Sternberg, 1997). According to Sternberg (1997),

the best available evidence is that biological and social factors work together to

produce such differences.

Ethnicity Much of the study in ethnic group differences in ability has occurred at

the level of g (see Neisser et al., 1996, for a comprehensive coverage of the associ-

ated findings and an insightful analysis of possible explanations). Although there

are some differences among ethnic groups in the levels and profiles of scores on

conventional intelligence and ability tests (Sternberg, 1997), ability test scores do

not generally show differential predictive validity in studies of selection bias

(Betz, 1992). In other words, test scores tend to be equally predictive of educa-

tional and occupational outcomes (such as grades and performance ratings), re-

gardless of examinee ethnicity. However, because many tests and self-estimates of

ability involve abilities (e.g., verbal, numerical) that are more or less heavily influ-

enced by education and training, it is important to take into account the quality of

the client’s educational background. This is especially salient when working with

ethnically or culturally diverse clientele because African Americans and other

minorities are more likely than Whites to be socioeconomically disadvantaged,

which may expose them to poorer school systems and the associated dearth of ed-

ucational opportunities that would facilitate performance on standardized tests

(Betz, 1992). Furthermore, while not totally explaining group differences in test

scores, socioeconomic factors also tend to play a role in that the poor nutrition,

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 341

342 A

SSESSMENT AND

CCUPATIONAL

NFORMATION

prenatal care, and intellectual resources associated with lower socioeconomic sta-

tus are likely to have negative effects on cognitive development (Neisser et al., 1996).

Disability Individuals with disabilities are defined as possessing a physical,

mental, or developmental impairment that substantially limits their engagement

in one or more of their major life activities (AERA, et al., 1999). The Standards for

Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, et al., 1999) encourages test users to

familiarize themselves with federal, state, and local laws or court rulings that

regulate the assessment of individuals with disabilities. This reference also pro-

vides helpful information about the rights of test takers with disabilities, the ap-

propriateness and responsible use of test accommodations and modifications, the

reporting of scores on modified tests, and professional standards for testing, in-

terpreting, and communicating the results of tests to individuals with disabili-

ties. Test users should also consult test manuals, accompanying materials, and/or

the test publisher if necessary about the appropriate deployment of test modifica-

tions or accommodations.

Two key issues to be especially attuned to when assessing individuals with dis-

abilities include the purpose for which the test was designed and validated, as well

as the norm data on which the test scores are interpreted (see also Fabian &

Liesener, Chapter 23, this volume). If a test is not designed and validated to diag-

nose special needs or disabilities, it is not valid to use the test for such a purpose.

Furthermore, it is important to determine whether the norm data that are used to

interpret scores on the test include samples of populations with special needs or

disabilities. If not, the use of the existing norm data will provide information only

about the test taker’s ability levels relative to the general population, rather than a

population of individuals with a specific type or degree of disability.

Counselors must use manual guidelines as well as their best judgment con-

cerning test modifications or accommodations, keeping in mind that test modifi-

cations may impair the validity of test interpretations. The ultimate goal is to

provide the individual with reliable self-knowledge to use in career development

and career decision making.

ABILITY MEASUREMENT: MAJOR

STRATEGIES AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS

We t urn now to a discussion of two major strategies of ability measurement (self-

estimation and objective assessment), as well as advantages and disadvantages

associated with each strategy. In so doing, we also present a brief overview of se-

lected self-estimate and objective ability measures on the market. Our purpose is

not exhaustiveness, but rather to provide a sampling of the types of tools available

to career counselors. The following criteria helped to guide our selection of the

highlighted tools:

•The instrument needs to have ability assessment as a primary purpose.

• It must be designed for and used in career counseling.

•

It must possess solid psychometric backing in terms of reliability and validity

estimate data (and it’s helpful if reviews or objective write-ups are available

on the instrument).

•

It must be fairly easy for counselors to access information about the instrument.

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 342

Ability Assessment in Career Counseling 343

While most of the instruments selected are widely used, we’ve also aimed to in-

clude lesser known, yet high-quality and useful instruments. We provide more

samples of objectively estimated versus self-estimated ability assessment instru-

ments because the number of instruments from which to draw examples that

meet the criteria outlined previously is larger for objectively estimated than for

self-estimated abilities.

ELF

-E

STIMATED

BILITIES

: A

DVANTAGES

, D

ISADVANTAGES

AND

SSESSMENT

OOLS

Many career professionals believe that people can adequately and accurately esti-

mate their own abilities. This is a point of contention in the field. In this section

we will look at ability self-estimation in some detail.

Advantages A key advantage of ability self-estimation is that it allows for the

measurement of abilities (e.g., leadership, teaching, helping others) not commonly

assessed by traditional multiaptitude test batteries (Harrington & Schafer, 1996;

Prediger, 1999a). Prediger (1999a) provided a succinct presentation of eight work-

relevant abilities that are not commonly assessed by objective paper-and-pencil

tests (i.e., meeting people, helping others, sales, leadership-management, organi-

zation, creative-literary, creative-artistic, and manual dexterity). These abilities

are clearly work-world relevant and are thus important to assess and consider in

career counseling.

Other advantages of self-estimated abilities include ease of administration and

scoring and lower cost relative to objective ability instruments. Furthermore, there

is evidence of correspondence between self-estimated ability factors and specific

work task dimensions underlying Holland’s (1997) hexagonal model of interest and

occupational types (Prediger, 1999a). This could aid the counselor and client’s abil-

ity to identify and explore occupational options that are congruent both with abil-

ity self-estimates and the work task dimensions underlying occupational interests

(Prediger, 1999a). Finally, self-estimates of ability take into account the powerful

roles of self-concept and the individual’s understanding of his or her abilities built

on years of experience and feedback (American College Testing [ACT], 2001).

We have found that self-ratings (formal or informal) can be an especially valu-

able tool when used in combination with objective test results because working

with a person to compare the two can yield helpful insights into self-ratings that

significantly under- or overestimate ability. Such a pairing of ability assessment in-

formation can prompt rich discussions about occupational areas in which interest

may have been prematurely truncated because of ability underestimation and oc-

cupational areas that would likely require more effort, motivation, or training than

previously assumed due to ability overestimation (see also Brown & Lent, 1996).

Disadvantages Betz (1992), however, urges caution in the use of ability self-

estimates because of research findings that suggest that self-estimates of ability

vary substantially from measured ability. As Prediger (1999a) stated, when ability

test and self-estimates results do not agree, both could be problematic in that

curacy depends in part on how the results are obtained. However, when Maurer

(1997) examined the accuracy of self-estimated abilities and employed several

measures of self-estimation accuracy to compensate for the limitations of the

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 343

344 A

SSESSMENT AND

CCUPATIONAL

NFORMATION

mea

sures used, he found that most participants were poor estimators of their own

abilities on all measures of accuracy. Intelligence was significantly correlated with

all measures of accuracy (i.e., more intelligent people were more accurate), and

sex differences were also found, with women tending to underestimate their abil-

ities and men tending to overestimate theirs. Additional evidence (e.g., Betsworth,

1999) suggests that women are significantly more likely to underestimate rather

than overestimate their abilities, and females in general tend to underuse their

abilities in educational and occupational pursuits (Betz, 1992). Furthermore, data

(Betsworth, 1999; Handschin, 1996) suggest that when there exists inconsistency

between tested and self-estimated abilities, people are more likely to choose occu-

pations that are consistent with their own self-estimates (see Brown & Ryan

Krane, 2000). The problem is that when doing so, such people may not have con-

sidered the widest possible range of potentially rewarding and satisfying career

choices (Brown & Ryan Krane, 2000). These data suggest the importance of helping

individuals to become fully cognizant of their objectively measured abilities (in

addition to their ability self-estimations).

Finally, the ability self-estimate assessment approach is reliant on individuals’

ability to report accurately their standing on various abilities compared to (in most

cases) an age cohort. Given the social-psychological importance of reference groups

(see Festinger, 1954; Kruglanski & Mayseless, 1990), it stands to reason that a re-

striction of range in ability in the individual’s primary reference group (either at

the low or high end of the ability spectrum) could conceivably serve to impair that

individual’s ability to appraise accurately his or her standing relative to a more

general (and appropriate) norm group. For instance, if the individual’s primary ref-

erence group is at the high end of the ability spectrum, the given individual may

tend to underestimate his or her abilities as compared to others in general. On the

other hand, if the individual’s primary reference group is at the low end of the abil-

ity spectrum, the individual in question may tend to overestimate his or her abili-

ties as compared to others in general (for related research, see Dunning, Johnson,

Ehrlinger, & Kruger, 2003).

Assessment Tools Several ability self-estimate measures exist on the market. De-

tailed information about each of these instruments can be found in their associated

technical, user’s, and/or administrator’s manuals, and some are described and re-

viewed in the fourth edition of A Counselor’s Guide to Career Assessment Instruments,

fourth edition (Kapes & Whitfield, 2001).

The Harrington-O’Shea Career Decision-Making System Revised-2000 (CDM-R

2000; Harrington & O’Shea, 2000) is a comprehensive career assessment instrument

that measures self-reported abilities in addition to other factors, including inter-

ests, career choices, school subjects, work values, and training plans. The system

uses this multidimensional information to suggest career options for further ex-

ploration (Kapes & Whitfield, 2001). According to Campbell and Raiff (2001), the

CDM-R 2000 relies largely on the psychometric information from the 1991 revision

and the original 1981 version, and its psychometric characteristics compare favor-

ably to similar instruments. In the CDM-R, participants are instructed to select

their four strongest abilities from a list of 14: Artistic, Clerical, Computational, Lan-

guage, Leadership, Manual, Mathematical, Mechanical, Musical, Persuasive, Scien-

tific, Social, Spatial, and Teaching. Hand-scored editions of the CDM-R 2000 are

available in English and Spanish for Levels 1 (middle school and low-level readers)

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 344

Ability Assessment in Career Counseling 345

and Level 2 (high school through adult); the computer-scored edition is available in

English for Level 2 (Kapes & Whitfield, 2001).

The Inventory of Work-Relevant Abilities (IWRA; ACT, 2001) is a component

of ACT’s Discover and Career Planning Survey programs. The IWRA contains 15

abilities rooted in the four basic work tasks of data, ideas, things, and people

that were chosen on the basis of their practical relevance to career counseling ap-

plications rather than to exhaust the pool of abilities relevant to the work world

(Prediger, 1999a): Reading, Numerical, Language Usage, Spatial Perception,

Clerical, Mechanical, Scientific, Creative/Literary, Creative/Artistic, Manual

Dexterity, Meeting People, Helping Others, Sales, Leadership (Management),

and Organization. Prediger (1999a) noted that the 15 abilities are work-world

comprehensive in that they address each of Holland’s six interest/personality

types. The IWRA asks respondents to estimate each ability compared to age

peers on a five-point scale, after which respondents are asked to review and

compare their estimates as a whole and make revisions if so desired. The result-

ing report allows users to see how their work-relevant abilities relate to a wide

variety of career options.

BJECTIVELY

STIMATED

BILITIES

: A

DVANTAGES

, D

ISADVANTAGES

AND

SSESSMENT

OOLS

Objective ability assessment has a rich history in the field of career counseling. In

this section, we discuss this assessment approach in more detail.

Advantages The primary advantage of objective ability measurement centers on

validity. A large body of literature exists that indicates objectively measured abil-

ities predict success in a variety of work endeavors (Dawis, 1996b). The same can-

not be said of ability self-estimates. While most of this research evidence has

been attributed to the predictive power of g (see Ree & Earles, 1991; Ree, Earles, &

Teachout, 1994), there is reason to believe that the emphasis given to g is mis-

guided (Dawis, 1996a; Murphy, 1996). Because many or most cognitive abilities

seem to be related to g, it is just as logical to consider substantively important

abilities (e.g., verbal, spatial) first in the prediction of performance and ask what

g adds to them as the other way around (Murphy, 1996). In short, and as sug-

gested by Murphy, the purpose underlying cognitive assessment is paramount. If

the purpose is to gain an understanding of a person’s ability to perform above av-

erage on a wide range of work tasks, then g is helpful. If a deeper purpose is to un-

derstand the nature and content of the work tasks that are likely to come quickly

and easily to the individual (as in career counseling), examination of individual

abilities is also very useful.

Another compelling argument for the use of objective ability assessment in ca-

reer counseling is the opportunity it creates for career clients to uncover or high-

light untapped areas of potential and thus consider a wider range of career options.

As previously mentioned, people have been known to underestimate their poten-

tial in various areas, thereby limiting the number and types of occupations that

they consider. Aptitude assessment provides objective information or evidence that

can sometimes be used to counter or challenge such erroneous beliefs in the service

of helping the individual to explore and consider a wider array of career options

(see Brown & Lent, 1996).

c14.qxd 8/5/04 9:26 AM Page 345