Sign up

Reducing adolescent career indecision: The ASVAB Career Exploration Program.
Subject:
Career development (Analysis)
Author:
Baker, Harley E.
Pub Date:
06/01/2002
Publication:
Name: Career Development Quarterly Publisher: National Career Development Association Audience: Trade Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Business; Human resources and labor relations Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2002 National Career Development Association ISSN: 0889-4019
Issue:
Date: June, 2002 Source Volume: 50 Source Issue: 4
Product:
Product Code: 9918560 Career Planning
Geographic:
Geographic Scope: United States Geographic Code: 1USA United States

Accession Number:
88701560
Full Text:
An independent evaluation of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) Career Exploration Program was conducted using nationally representative samples of high school students. The sample consisted of current ASVAB Program participants (n = 255) and two control groups of nonparticipants (n = 233, n = 189). A pretest-posttest design showed that participation in the ASVAB Program increased career exploration knowledge and reduced diffusion and approach-approach forms of career indecision, as assessed by the Career Decision Scale (S. Osipow, 1986).

**********

The Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) Career Exploration Program is one of the largest career exploration programs in the world. Annually, it serves between 800,000 and 900,000 high school and postsecondary students in more than 14,000 schools nationwide. This means that more than one fourth of all high school seniors will have participated in the ASVAB Program during their high school years (Baker, 2000).

Since its inception in 1968, the ASVAB Program has undergone considerable and substantial revision. The current version, fielded in 1992, is a cooperative endeavor between the nation's schools and the Department of Defense (DoD). The ASVAB Program provides a comprehensive vocational assessment package at no cost to participating schools or to their students. Funded entirely by the DoD, this comprehensive package contains two major assessment instruments and a number of exercises that help students identify and investigate occupations for which they show interest and ability. The ASVAB Program fulfills two major purposes. First, the program provides age and developmentally appropriate materials to support high school and postsecondary educational and career counseling. In this regard, the ASVAB Program assists students in planning for their post-high school years. Whether these plans include the pursuit of postsecondary education, job training opportunities, or immediate entry into the world of work, the ASVAB Program provides materials to enhance students' career exploration and career choices. Second, the program is useful to the military services as an aid in the process of identifying interested students who meet the qualifications for entrance into the U.S. Armed Forces (Defense Manpower Data Center, 1995).

In 1995, the DoD contracted with the American Institutes of Research to conduct a thorough review and evaluation of the ASVAB Career Exploration Program. This evaluation focused on the program's influence on student career choice and development, program implementation, the quality of the career guidance materials and components, the adequacy of the technical underpinnings of the program, and the program's effect on military recruiting. Questionnaires and interviews were used to collect the relevant data from nationally representative samples of nonparticipating students, current-year program participants, prior-year program participants, and high school counselors. In general, the findings indicated that although there are substantial gender differences in why students elect to participate in the ASVAB Program, about three quarters of both male and female adolescents participate because they want to engage in career exploration. Consistent with this, about a third of the students who elect not to participate do so because they fail to see the relevancy of the ASVAB Program to their career goals and plans. Compared with their nonparticipating peers, the students who participated indicated an increase in several career development areas during the course of this study. For example, they reported relative gains in self-knowledge, occupational knowledge, and ways to connect the two together. Furthermore, although students' attitudes and thoughts may have changed considerably because of participation, their career exploration behavior did not change. The only behavior that was found to increase more for participants than for nonparticipants was interaction with recruiters. Complete details of this evaluation are available elsewhere (Defense Manpower Data Center, 2000).

A technical document no longer available to the public (Levine, Huberman, & Wall, 1996) and a vocational newsletter news brief (Wall, 1996) reported the effects of the ASVAB Program on career exploration and career indecision. Using the same evaluation data, the present study differs from these previous studies in two important ways. First, rather than examine the career exploration items separately, the items were combined to create a Career Exploration Knowledge Scale. The use of this scale provides a more coherent and systematic analysis of the ASVAB Program's effect on career exploration. Second, the previous reports analyzed the Career Decision Scale (CDS; Osipow, 1986) as a unidimensional measure of career indecision. In contrast, the present study relied on the four factor analytically derived CDS subscales reported by Vondracek and his colleagues (Schulenberg, Shimizu, Vondracek, & Hostetler, 1988; Shimizu, Vondracek, Schulenberg, & Hostetler, 1988; Vondracek, Hostetler, Schulenberg, & Shimizu, 1990).

ASVAB Career Exploration Program

Description

The ASVAB Career Exploration Program was designed to teach career exploration skills useful both for entry into the workforce and for continued career development. The program was designed for flexible use so that it could fit the needs of the schools and the students who participate in the program. The ASVAB Program can be integrated with other career education and development programs, or it can be the foundation on which further career education and development activities can stand. Designed for optimal use by high school sophomores, juniors, seniors, and students in postsecondary schools, the program is rooted in the trait-and-factor approach first articulated by Parsons (1909). By completing interest, aptitude, and work value measures, students can gain a broader sense of self-knowledge. Knowledge of the world of work comes from the extensive information on a diverse set of jobs catalogued by the ASVAB Program. This information consists of the Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional (RIASEC) interest code (Holland, 1985) for the job; the typical cognitive demands required for entry into and success in the job; and the typical work values held by job incumbents. Finally, the "true logic" that relates people to careers is provided through the OCCU-FIND exercise, in which students find careers that match their own ability, interest, and work value characteristics.

The program relies on the ASVAB (Defense Manpower Data Center, 1995) and the Interest-Finder (IF; Wall, Wise, & Baker, 1996) to provide information about students' academic abilities and career interests, respectively. The ASVAB is the most widely used multiple aptitude test battery in the United States (Defense Manpower Data Center, 1995). The 10 ASVAB subtests (General Science, Arithmetic Reasoning, Word Knowledge, Paragraph Comprehension, Numerical Operations, Coding Speed, Auto & Shop Information, Mathematics Knowledge, Mechanical Comprehension, and Electronics Information) provide a broad view of students' aptitudes. Students' scores are reported as both same grade/same sex and same grade/opposite sex percentile scores. Three composites--Verbal Ability (VA), Math Ability (MA), and Academic Ability (AA)--are reported to students as same grade/same sex and same grade/opposite sex percentiles. The composite AA, which is a combination of the VA and MA, assesses potential for formal education. The IF is based on Holland's (1985) theory of career choice. Wall et al. (1996) and Wall and Baker (1997) provide considerable evidence in support of the content, construct, and predictive validity of the IF as a measure of the RIASEC constructs. For example, the six scales are highly reliable, with alpha coefficients ranging from .93 to .97. Item-level factor analysis demonstrates the existence of six factors, with each factor corresponding to one of the IF scales and with each factor uniquely representing the corresponding RIASEC domain. The IF has a hexagonal shape and structure, and the scales correlate between .68 and .78 with their corresponding Strong Interest Inventory (SII) RIASEC scales (Hansen & Campbell, 1985) and significantly with the appropriate SII Basic Interest scales. Although gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status differences exist on some of the IF scales, these differences are relatively small when compared with the differences found on the SII. IF scales are related both to courses taken in high school and to students' expected future careers. Students' personal preferences in several domains (e.g., work values, post-high school education, interest in military service) are also assessed to gain a more complete picture of the students' goals and plans.

From the ASVAB, IF, and personal preferences, students gain considerable self-relevant information. Students then complete the OCCU-FIND exercise, which provides the link from the self-relevant personal characteristics to occupational characteristics. In this exercise, students use a special marker to highlight their top three RIASEC codes, their ASVAB AA primary and secondary codes, their four highest work values, their desire for further education, and whether they are interested in military career opportunities. Latent image stars appear that show students the "matching" occupations, based on the highlighted characteristics. From this, students gain a sense of how well suited they might be for each of the 201 OCCU-FIND occupations. Students are then directed to find those occupations for which there is a good match and to investigate them further in the Occupational Outlook Handbook (Department of Labor, 1994) and in Military Careers (Department of Defense, 1995). Students are encouraged to complete additional career-related exercises that are designed to help them develop career exploration skills.

From the student's perspective, participation in the ASVAB Program is straightforward. Students sign up to take the ASVAB administered at their high school. When they sign up, they receive the Student and Parent Guide. This guide explains the ASVAB Program in language understandable to students and their families. After completing the ASVAB, students also sign up for the post-ASVAB test interpretation. In this session, students receive their ASVAB scores, complete the IF and other exercises in the student workbook, and complete the OCCU-FIND exercises. Throughout the test interpretation session, ASVAB Program personnel help students interpret their scores and the meaning of those scores in the context of students' subsequent career exploration and development. Typically, ASVAB scores are available within 10 days of completing the test, and the posttest interpretation session generally takes place shortly after the test results are returned to the schools.

The program relies on the strength of the materials it provides to participants, their schools, and their families. Materials designed for use by school counselors include an educator and counselor guide, a counselor manual, a technical manual, and a book outlining military careers. Students receive the Student and Parent Guide, an ASVAB workbook, and their own individualized ASVAB test results. Counselors, students, and their parents receive a pamphlet on the basic skills of career exploration. These materials meet or exceed the psychometric, test use, and career development standards established by the American Counseling Association, American Psychological Association, Association for Assessment in Counseling, and National Career Development Association (DuBois, 1995).

An Intervention That Reduces Career Indecision

Spokane (1991) defined a career intervention as "any activity (treatment or effort) designed to enhance a person's career development or to enable that person to make more effective career decisions" (p. 22). From this perspective, participation in the ASVAB Program clearly constitutes a career intervention. Based on a trait-and-factor approach, the ASVAB Program is designed to increase participants' career relevant self-knowledge, knowledge of the world of work, and how to link the two. Because career exploration knowledge is inversely related to career indecision (Betz & Voyten, 1997), reduced career indecision would be a likely outcome of participating in the ASVAB Program. Because career indecision is a multifaceted construct, it seems reasonable to expect that the ASVAB Program would have differential effects across those facets. Osipow, Carney, and Barak (1976) suggested that career indecision can be conceptualized in terms of four components: (a) lack of structure for understanding and making career choices, (b) external barriers that prevent or inhibit the implementation of a preferred career choice, (c) multipotentiality that arises from the conflict between equally attractive choices, and (d) conflict with others over these choices. Although Osipow (1994) disagreed, item-level factor analysis tends to confirm the presence of these factors in the CDS (Spokane, 1991).

Research Questions and Hypotheses

The knowledge that ASVAB participants gain both about themselves and about the world of work should help to demystify the process of career exploration (Parsons, 1909). Consequently, students should (a) gain a greater degree of confidence about their ability to engage the career process and (b) have a starting point from which to launch an appropriate process of career exploration. The result would be a reduced sense of career indecision due both to a lack of structure and to multipotentiality. This study was designed to provide answers to two questions: (a) Do participants gain self-knowledge relevant to career exploration? and (b) Does participation in the ASVAB Program decrease career indecision that is due to lack of structure or multipotentiality but not to external barriers or conflict?

Method

Sampling Design Plan

A multistage random sampling plan was used to select and recruit the sample. First, the country was stratified into the 64 regions corresponding to the 64 ASVAB Career Exploration Program regional offices. Random selection procedures selected 48 regions from which to invite schools to participate in this study. The first 3 regions were assigned to a "participating school" condition while the fourth was assigned to the "nonparticipating" school condition. This helped to provide geographic balance and helped to ensure that the schools were representative of the population of U.S. high schools. In each of these selected regions, random selection procedures identified a first-, second-, and third-choice school for potential inclusion in the study. If a first-choice school elected not to participate, the second- and third-choice schools were recruited as necessary, resulting in 48 high schools in the sample frame (35 first-, 8 second-, and 5 third-choice schools). Finally, individual students were selected for inclusion. At the ASVAB schools, 36 students were randomly selected for the study. At the non-ASVAB schools, similar procedures were used to select 24 students for the study. When students preferred not to participate, random selection was used to identify and recruit replacement students in both sets of schools. In all, 971 students were solicited for this study. Of these, 725 (75%) participated in both the pretest and the posttest phase of this study. A number of respondents (n = 48, 5%) were eliminated because of (a) too much missing data in the questionnaire, (b) obvious inattention to instructions, or (c) violating the CDS validity recommendations. This left 677 (70%) participants in this study, which lasted one semester.

Participants

Current program participants (Group A; n = 255) were students who participated in the ASVAB program. There were two groups of nonparticipants: Group B students (n = 233) were from the same schools from which Group A respondents were sampled; Group C students (n = 189) were sampled from schools not participating in the ASVAB program. Groups B and C functioned as control groups.

About half (53%, n = 362) of the sample were boys and about half (47%, n = 315) were girls. There was no evidence of gender differences across the three groups, [chi square](2, n = 677) = .07, p = .964. Most of the students were either seniors (39%, n = 267) or juniors (51%, n = 347), with only a few sophomores (9%, n = 63). Although the grade-level composition differed significantly across the three groups, [chi square](4, n = 677) = 88.99, p = .001, Cramer's effect size statistic was small (V = .24), indicating only a weak grade-level difference. Although a large proportion of the sample was Caucasian (72%, n = 484), the sample also included African Americans (12%, n = 81), Hispanics (9%, n = 61), Asian or Pacific Islanders (6%, n = 40), and American Indians (2%, n = 11). There was no evidence of racial differences across the three groups, [chi square](8, n = 677) = 12.20, p = .142. About half of the students considered themselves to be in the college track (49%, n = 332), and about a third of the students (33%, n = 222) indicated they were in a "general track." Only about a seventh of the students (16%, n = 110) indicated that they were in a vocational or occupational track; few students indicated that their high school careers did not match any of these tracks (2%, n = 13). These differences were also statistically significant, [chi square](6, n = 677) = 63.83, p = .001, although the associated Cramer's V indicated that the differences were weak at best (V = .18).

Measures

Questionnaires were administered to all study respondents. ASVAB Program participants (Group A) received one form of the questionnaire, whereas the nonparticipant groups (Groups B and C) received a different form of the questionnaire. The two forms contained a common set of questions concerning basic demographic and current educational characteristics and questions to assess respondents' career exploration knowledge, career exploration behavior, and attitudes toward the military. Group A respondents also answered pretest questions about how they had heard about the ASVAB Program and why they participated. They answered posttest questions about their evaluation of the program and how participation may have affected their career paths and trajectories. Group B respondents answered questions about why they chose not to participate in the ASVAB Program. Group C respondents answered no additional questions. Respondents in all groups completed the CDS (Osipow, 1986), one of the most widely cited and well-used measures in the career development field (Osipow, 1994). Because the focus of this study was on adolescent career indecision, only the career exploration and CDS sections were analyzed.

Respondents answered five items assessing how well they could match their own skills and abilities with job requirements. The items assessed (a) career-relevant self-knowledge ("I know what kind of career I want to pursue after I leave high school," "I have a good idea of my abilities and skills"), (b) occupational knowledge ("I know what is required to succeed in different careers"), and (c) ways to connect the two ("I know how to find out about what types of jobs are best for me," "I have a good idea of the kinds of jobs I would be good at"). The responses to these 4-point Likert questions were combined to form a Career Exploration Knowledge Scale (CEKS; [alpha] = .78; see Table 1).

All study respondents completed the CDS (Osipow, 1986). The CDS assesses four distinct types of career indecision by using the Diffusion, Support, Approach-Approach, and External Barriers subscales (Schulenberg et al., 1988; Shimizu et al., 1988; Vondracek et al., 1990). The Diffusion subscale assesses feelings of confusion and discouragement and the lack of information about making career decisions. The Support subscale assesses uncertainty concerning the career decision-making process and the need for additional support in making initial career decisions. The Approach--Approach subscale assesses the degree to which individuals experience an approach--approach conflict over choosing from among a number of equally attractive careers. The External Barriers subscale assesses the perception of external barriers to career decision making and the lack of interest in making career decisions. Pretest, posttest, and gain scores were calculated according to the scoring procedures provided by Vondracek et al. For each type, the possible scores range from 1 (not at all like me) to 4 (exactly like me), with higher values indicative of higher levels of career indecision. The subscale correlations ranged from .26 (Diffusion with Support) to .57 (Diffusion with External Barriers), which are similar in magnitude to the correlations reported (.36-.58) by Vondracek et al. Although somewhat low (see Table 1), the alpha reliability estimates (.61-.76) were of sufficient magnitude to warrant the use of the four subscales in the analyses.

Procedure

Before data collection, all potential respondents received a packet of material that contained an explanation of the study's purpose and parental consent forms. Respondents who returned the completed consent forms also completed the appropriate pretest questionnaire in group settings during January 1995. Within a week of completing the pretest questionnaires, Group A respondents took part in the ASVAB Program by completing the ASVAB, receiving their scores, and taking part in the post--ASVAB interpretation session. All participants completed the posttest questionnaires in May 1995. This study used a quasi-experimental design to study the effects of participation in the ASVAB Program. Because random assignment was not used, group equivalency at the beginning of the study could not be guaranteed. Factors such as participating in other career development programs or engaging in other career development activities were not controlled during the study.

Results

CEKS pretest scores (see Table 1) were submitted to a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine pretest differences among the groups. The highly significant result, F(2, 673) = 12.21, p = .001, substantiated that initial group differences were present. Dunnett tests revealed significantly lower scores for Group A than for Group B (p = .046) and Group C (p = .049) students. This initial difference invalidates the use of an analysis of covariance because the covariate (pretest score) was not statistically independent of the treatment (group membership). In these situations, Maxwell and Delaney (1990) recommended analysis of the gain scores. Consequently, a Participation Group x Gender x Ethnicity x School Program x Grade ANOVA analyzed the CEKS gain scores. Respondents with missing data on one or more of these variables (n = 15, 2%) were excluded from this analysis. Because none of the between-group interaction effects approached statistical significance, the main effect model was used to assess pretest --posttest changes (see Maxwell & Delaney, 1990). Only the differences due to participation group were significant, F(2, 661) = 10.20, p = .001. Dunnett tests revealed significantly greater positive change (p = .001) for the ASVAB group (Group A) than for either of the nonparticipant control groups (Groups B and C).

CDS subscale pretest scores (see Table 1) were submitted to a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to determine pretest differences among the groups. The significant Wilks's A = .97, F(2, 673) = 2.27, p = .020 substantiated an initial multivariate difference among the groups. This difference invalidates the use of a multivariate analysis of covariance because the covariates (pretest scores) were not statistically independent of the treatment (group membership). Therefore, gain scores were submitted to a Participation Group x Gender x Ethnicity x School Program x Grade MANOVA. Because none of the interaction effects approached significance, the main effect model was used to assess these pretest--posttest changes. Only the participation group difference was found to be significant, F(8, 1298) = 2.66, p = .007. Follow-up univariate ANOVA revealed significant differences on the Diffusion subscale, F(2,657), = 3.40, p = .034, and Approach--Approach subscale, F(2, 657) = 5.10, p .006. Dunnett tests revealed significantly greater positive change (p < .02) for the ASVAB group (Group A) than for either of the nonparticipant control groups (Groups B and C) on the Approach--Approach subscale. Dunnett tests indicated greater positive change for the ASVAB group (Group A) than for one control group (Group C, p = .021) and a nearly significant change compared with the other control group (Group B, p = .058) on the Diffusion subscale. Significant differences failed to emerge on the Support subscale, F(2, 657) = 0.74, p = .476, and the External Barriers subscale, F(2, 657) = 1.81, p = .165.

Discussion

The results of this study suggest that participation in the ASVAB Career Exploration Program lowers certain kinds of career indecision while it increases aspects of career exploration knowledge. These findings lend credence to the view that the ASVAB Career Exploration Program functions as an age-appropriate career intervention (Spokane, 1991) for high school students. Career exploration encompasses activities directed toward enhancing knowledge of the self and knowledge of the environment. The individual engages in these activities as a means of self-assessment and to gather information from the environment that will aid in the decision-making, job entry, and vocational adjustment processes (Blustein & Flum, 1999). Such exploration is important and necessary to reduce career indecision, because indecision may best be reduced by obtaining appropriate knowledge of self, work, and ways to connect the two (Parsons, 1909). By focusing participants on their own career-relevant characteristics in a systematic fashion, the ASVAB Program may help provide participants with an appropriate sense of direction as they begin or continue their career-relevant deliberations. Such direction should tend to decrease certain kinds of career indecision while not affecting other types at all.

From this vantage point, it is interesting that the diffusion and approach--approach aspects of career indecision were influenced by program participation. One would expect increased self-relevant knowledge to reduce both of these types of career indecision. By increasing students' sense of career relevant self-knowledge, the ASVAB Program should tend to decrease participants' sense of diffusion. In this context, diffusion refers to the confusion and discouragement associated with the lack of relevant information about making career decisions. Students' enhanced self-knowledge, coupled with a new way of approaching career decision-making activities, should almost certainly reduce the negative affect associated with diffusion. In a similar fashion, an increased sense of career relevant self-knowledge should also help students begin to resolve the approach- approach conflict experienced when trying to choose from among a number of equally attractive career alternatives. It also seems apparent why program partic ipation did not influence either the support or external barrier form of career indecision. By focusing students' attention on personal and job characteristics, the issues that surround parental and familial support and external barriers to success are addressed only indirectly. For example, although the ASVAB Program strongly advises students to use parents, family, family friends, and others close to them to enhance their career development, the program does not compel students to do so. By advising students to investigate jobs that match their own personal characteristics, the ASVAB Program at best only invites students to consider the presence of external barriers in their deliberations. Adequate treatment of the influence of external barriers on career development is often cited as one of the major failings of the trait-and-factor approaches (Blustein & Ellis, 2000; Brown, 2000).

Other interpretations are possible, though, given the data and the findings. For example, because this was not an experimental study, it was not possible to control for initial student differences in career exploration knowledge or career indecision. ASVAB participants may have started the study with less career exploration knowledge and with higher levels of career indecision than did their peers. If their posttest scores showed no such differences, one could argue that the ASVAB Program merely ameliorated and removed those initial differences. If so, it is possible that ASVAB Program outcomes depend on students' initial reasons for participating in the program. Some students, for example, may elect not to participate because they already have a relatively clear idea of their post--high school plans and endeavors. For these students, the program may seem irrelevant. Others may view it as a military test and, therefore, not of interest to them. In both of these scenarios, students seem already to be malting c areer development decisions based on their self-understanding and interests. Students who elect to participate may already have career development concerns. For these students, the ASVAB Program may be particularly attractive as a way of addressing some of these concerns. This interpretation, consistent with a self-determination perspective (Blustein & Flum, 1999), is also consistent with the findings. For example, ASVAB participants (Group A) had higher pretest levels of diffusion and approach--approach types of career indecision than did the two control groups. As such, perhaps participation may merely have ameliorated their initial deficit, making them more like their peers on the posttest than on the pretest. However, even if this is the case, it suggests that students recognized that the ASVAB Program could have a positive effect on their subsequent career development.

There were a number of limitations in this study. In addition to the initial differences between the groups, this was not an experiment. Study participants were not placed in groups by random assignment, and no attempts were made to ensure that the groups did not engage in additional career development activities that might have influenced their posttest outcomes. As such, it is possible that the findings merely reflect the effect of these additional career development activities. This threat to validity, however, is not compelling because it would have required that the ASVAB participants engage in additional career development activities, whereas participants in the two control groups would not have engaged in these activities. Findings reported elsewhere (Defense Manpower Data Center, 2000) show that the groups did not differ in their career-related behaviors during the course of the study.

Overall, the findings lend support to the efficacy of the ASVAB Career Exploration Program both in enhancing self-knowledge associated with career exploration and in reducing the experience of career indecision among high school students. For high school career counselors, the findings have clear implications. First, the findings provide solid evidence that high school students benefit by participating in such a broad-based career intervention program. Second, students who participate in the ASVAB Program can expect to gain career relevant self-knowledge and to experience a reduction in their career indecision. That the program is free of cost both to schools and to students is an important point as well, given the relatively poor funding available for such programs in the schools.

References

Baker, H. (2000, July). Cross-sectional vs. cohort participation rates. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Center for Education Statistics Summer Data Conference, Washington, DC.

Betz, N. E., & Voyten, K. K. (1997). Efficacy and outcome expectations influence career exploration and decidedness. The Career Development Quarterly, 46, 179-189.

Blustein, D. L., & Ellis, M. V. (2000). The cultural context of career assessment. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 379-390.

Blustein, D. L., & Flum, H. (1999). A self-determination perspective of interests and exploration in career development. In M. L. Savickas & A. R. Spokane (Eds.), Vocational interests: Meaning, measurement and counseling use (pp. 345-368). Palo Alto, CA: DaviesBlack.

Brown, M. T. (2000). Blueprint for the assessment of socio-structural influences in career choice and decision making. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 371-378.

Defense Manpower Data Center. (1995). Counselor manual for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) Career Exploration Program. Seaside, CA: Author.

Defense Manpower Data Center. (2000). Technical manual for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) Career Exploration Program--Revised Edition. Seaside, CA: Author.

Department of Defense. (1995). Military careers. Washington, DC: Author.

Department of Labor. (1994). Occupational outlook handbook. Washington, DC: Author.

DuBois, P. A. (1995). Evaluation of the Career Exploration Program in terms of the standards of four professional organizations. Unpublished manuscript, American Institutes for Research, Palo Alto, CA.

Hansen, J. C., & Campbell, D. P. (1985). Manual for the Strong Interest Inventory (4th ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Levine, R., Huberman, M., & Wall, J. (1996). ASVAB Career Exploration Program: Impact on students (DMDC Technical Report 96-006). Seaside, CA: Defense Manpower Data Center.

Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1990). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Osipow, S. (1986). Career Decision Scale manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Osipow, S. H. (1994). The Career Decision Scale: How good does it have to be? Journal of Career Assessment, 2, 15-18.

Osipow, S. H., Carney, C. G., & Barak, A. (1976). A scale of educational and vocational undecidedness: A typological approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 9, 233-243.

Parsons, F. (1909). Choosing a vocation. Garret Park, MD: Garret Park Press.

Schulenberg, J. E., Shimizu, K., Vondracek, F. W., & Hostetler, M. (1988). Factorial invariance of career indecision dimensions across junior high and high school males and females. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 33, 63-81.

Shimizu, K., Vondracek, F. W., Schulenberg, J. E., & Hostetler, M. (1988). The factor structure of the Career Decision Scale: Similarities across selected studies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32, 213-225.

Spokane, A. R. (1991). Career intervention. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Vondracek, F. W., Hostetler, M., Schulenberg, J. E., & Shimizu, K. (1990). Dimensions of career indecision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 98-106.

Wall, J. E. (1996, November). ASVAB Career Exploration Program: Impact on student career development. AACE Bonus Brief 1-7. Hermosa Beach, CA: American Association for Career Education.

Wall, J. E., & Baker, H. E. (1997). The Interest-Finder: Evidence of validity. Journal of Career Assessment, 5, 255-273.

Wall, J. E., Wise, L. L., & Baker, H. E. (1996). Development of the Interest-Finder: A new RIASEC-based interest inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 29, 134-152.

Harley B. Baker, Defense Manpower Data Center, Seaside, Galifornia. Harley E. Baker is now at the Psychology Department California State University Channel Islands. The author thanks Alan Nicewander at the Defense Manpower Data Center, Janet Wall at Sage Solutions, and Roger Levine and Mette Huberman at the American Institutes for Research for their substantial contributions to this study. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Department of Defense. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Harley E. Baker, Psychology Department, California State University Channel Islands, One University Drive, Camarillo, CA 93012 (e-mail: harley.baker@csuci.edu).
TABLE 1

Career Exploration Knowledge Scale (CEKS) and Career Decision Scale
(CDS) Subscale Pretest and Posttest Means and Standard Deviations

                                            Treatment Group

Test                        Overall (a)                  Group A (b)
Administration  [alpha]         M        SD                M

Pretest
  CEKS (e)          .78        2.91      .52             2.80
  CDS (f)
   Diffusion        .76        2.00      .85             2.11
   Support          .61        2.15      .74             2.27
   Approach-
    Approach        .69        2.44      .81             2.57
   External
    Barriers        .64        1.73      .65             1.76
Posttest
  CEKS (e)          .83        2.98      .53             3.00
  CDS (f)
   Diffusion        .76        1.97      .81             1.98
   Support          .65        2.12      .74             2.20
   Approach-
    Approach        .72        2.35      .81             2.36
   External
    Barriers        .69        1.77      .65             1.80

                                 Treatment Group

Test             Group A           Group B (e)           Group C (d)
                   (b)
Administration  SD              M        SD              M

Pretest
  CEKS (e)      .51           2.93       .54           3.04
  CDS (f)
   Diffusion    .89           1.93       .84           1.92
   Support      .70           2.08       .75           2.09
   Approach-
    Approach    .80           2.36       .82           2.36
   External
    Barriers    .64           1.73       .65           1.68
Posttest
  CEKS (e)      .52           2.94       .58           3.01
  CDS (f)
   Diffusion    .79           1.94       .84           1.98
   Support      .70           2.03       .76           2.13
   Approach-
    Approach    .77           2.32       .85           2.38
   External
    Barriers    .65           1.72       .60           1.79

                Treatment
                  Group

Test             Group C
                   (d)
Administration  SD

Pretest
  CEKS (e)      .47
  CDS (f)
   Diffusion    .81
   Support      .78
   Approach-
    Approach    .80
   External
    Barriers    .67
Posttest
  CEKS (e)      .49
  CDS (f)
   Diffusion    .82
   Support      .76
   Approach-
    Approach    .83
   External
    Barriers    .69

Note. Group A = Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Career
Exploration Program current year participants.

Group B = nonparticipants at participating schools.

Group C = nonparticipants at nonparticipating schools.

(a)N = 662.

(b)n = 246.

(c)n = 231.

(d)n = 185.

(e)Higher scores indicate more career exploration knowledge.

(f)Higher scores indicate more career indecision.
Gale Copyright:
Copyright 2002 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.