Self Directed Search Training

SDS Training Overview and Impact of the RIASEC theory History of SDS Description of Components Interpretation Development Reliability and Validity Administration/Scoring Options

Overview Self-administered, self-scored, and self-interpreted career counseling tool Originally developed by John Holland, based on his RIASEC person-environment typology: Realistic Investigative Artistic Social Enterprising Conventional

Hexagonal Model

Impact of Holland’s Theory Holland’s theory has been described as the most comprehensively studied career theory (Brown & Lent, 2013; Nauta, 2010; pokane & Cruza-Guet, 2005) Holland’s RIASEC typology is the most widely used model for organizing career interest assessment instruments (Gottfredson & Holland, 1996) It is used in approximately 50 different career information delivery systems (McDaniel & Snell, 1999; Savikas, 1999) “Arguably no theory of career development has had a greater influence on the practice of career counseling and education than Holland’s” (Rayman and Atanasoff, 1999) Holland’s theory has come to dominate the design of most interest inventories (Savikas, 1999)

Journal Citations (Nauta, 2010)

Holland Bibliography (1953-2011) (Foutch, McHugh, Bertoch, & Reardon, 2013)

Historical Overview 1971 First Edition 1971- 1975 Several changes to scoring 1977 Major revision to scoring 50 jobs added to OF 1985 reduce item overlap Omit items with extreme endorsement ↑ applicability to larger age range Update the instructions OF increased from 501 to 1,156 1994 67 items revised + fast-growing jobs - declining jobs + jobs ↑GED levels - of ↓GED levels Substitution of job titles Inclusion of all 3-letter Holland codes Better instructions Reminders to explore all permutations of code 2010 Revision of OF to include O*NET codes 2013 Release of 5th Edition of the SDS Form R

Educational Opportunities Finder Leisure Activities Finder Assessment Booklet Summary Code Educational Opportunities Finder Leisure Activities Finder You and Your Career Occupation Finder

The activity is structured around questions such as: It is more than a test or an inventory-it is a simulated career decision-making activity with sections that cover activities that might typically occur during a career counseling or advising session. The activity is structured around questions such as: What occupations have you thought about in the past? Tell me about the things you like to do. What things can you do well or competently? What occupations do or do not appeal to you? How would you rate your abilities and skills compared to others your age? The SDS captures the responses to these questions and links them to other tools for educational and career planning.

1. Occupational Daydreams Measure of expressed interests Studies indicate that aspirations can be as predictive of future occupational entry as formal, standardized interest inventory results (e.g., Schoon, 2001) Practitioners can examine not only the occupation(s) listed but also the RIASEC code(s) associated with the expressed daydreams Practitioner can suggest using the code listed for the first daydream occupation to search for more possibilities in occupations or fields of study with that same code Aspirations Summary Code The process of recalling an occupational history, the user is bringing into current memory some occupations that may have been forgotten

2. Activities Section Mimics a counseling session where a practitioner might ask a person to report on hobbies, activities, and leisure interests, as well as the activities that he or she doesn’t enjoy Includes 6 RIASEC scales of 14 items Like or Dislike It is possible that there is an important story behind many of the items marked “like” or “dislike” by the user in this section

3. Competencies Section Practitioners would typically ask clients to describe their skills (things they had learned to do in the past; things that the client had never done before) Should not ignore history of skills, education, and work-related accomplishments Includes 6 RIASEC scales of 14 items each Yes or No format People often develop skills in things that are important or interesting to them

4. Occupations Section Provides the practitioner with some information about the feelings/attitudes the user has toward a set of occupations Based on Holland’s Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI) Includes 6 RIASEC scales of 14 items each Yes or No format The number and type of occupations they endorse provides a wealth of information

5. Self-Estimates Section Self-efficacy, or beliefs that a person can actually do particular tasks Help address situations when a person has a high ability score (e.g., math) but reports low self-ratings (e.g., math/science). Interest in creative arts, but no perceived abilities in this area. 6 RIASEC scales are rated twice (from 1 to 7) with respect to ability/skills Users are asked to rate themselves on each of the traits, as compared with other persons their own age

5. Self-Estimates Section Mechanical ability Scientific ability Artistic ability Teaching ability Sales ability Clerical skills Manual skills Math ability Musical ability Understanding of Others Managerial skills Office skills

Summary Score Provides a way to move from a simulation to an assessed measure of interests Summary Code = a measure of a users’ vocational personality

Assessment Booklet What Your Summary Code Means Some Next Steps Brief description and suggestions Some Next Steps Activities that can help further explore Resources Websites that provide additional information

You and Your Career Understanding Careers Description of RIASEC type/occupational types Making Career Decisions Resources

Occupations Finder Revised to include new and developing occupations Over 1,200 occupations included Summary Codes are linked to occupations found in the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) database

Veteran and Military Occupations Finder Two Indexes: The Military Occupations Index lists active Military Occupational Classifications (MOCs) and corresponding two-letter Holland Occupational Codes (HOC). The Military to Civilian Occupations Crosswalk lists active MOCs along with corresponding civilian occupations and two-letter HOCs. All Five Branches: Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine Corps, Navy Based on a crosswalk between MOC and O*NET Occupations that was created for the My Next Move for Veterans program

Educational Opportunities Finder Revised using the 2010 Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) Over 1,000 programs of study Individuals can use the online O*NET Education Crosswalk to find info about occupations that correspond to programs of study identified in the EOF

Leisure Activity Finder Revised to include new and developing leisure activities Over 800 leisure activities, over 100 more than 1997 edition

Client Report RIASEC theory, description of the Summary Code and other resources, similar to YYC Includes specific information about the client: the occupations, programs of study and leisure activities associated with their code

Professional Report In addition to the information contained in the Client Report Diagnostic Signs Summary Table Provides specific interpretative text/recommendations based on client’s scores

Interpretation Some view the SDS as a simple tool that falls short of being a sophisticated, complex assessment of career interests One of the strengths of the SDS is the straightforward way it collects personal information and transforms it into educational, occupational, and leisure options In addition, it provides useful diagnostic information that informs the career counseling process

Theory Based Interpretive Ideas Basic Interpretive Ideas Personality – interests, traits, goals and values implied by Summary Code Congruence – degree of fit between Summary Code and Summary Aspiration Code

Theory Based Interpretive Ideas Qualifying Interpretive Ideas Coherence - refers to the degree to which the first letters of codes for the first three occupations listed in the user’s Daydreams belong in the same Holland Code category. Consistency – refers to the personality pattern or interest profile in terms of proximity of the first two letters of the Summary Code on the hexagon.

Theory Based Interpretive Ideas Qualifying Interpretive Ideas (cont.) Profile Elevation – total number of positive responses across all items Differentiation – level of distinctness in a profile (lowest score from the highest) Commonness – frequency with which a code is observed in a comparison sample

Item Development Form R and CP items were combined Experts reviewed suggestions and made recommendations Panel rated new items on: Quality of item Degree to which the item represent the associated RIASEC type Face validity/relevance of the item Potential bias or other problems

Pilot Sample Sample Size 206 Gender Male 48.1 Female 51.9 Average Age 34.3 (range 11-70) Race/Ethnicity 84.0% Caucasian 12.1% African American 0.0% Hispanic 3.0% Other Level of Education (Adults) 20.4% School-age (grade 5-12) 11.2% Less than HS degree 18.4% HS graduate 16.3% Some college 33.7% College graduate Included 22 items per scale (from 12)

Standardization Sample Size 1,739 Gender Male 49.5 Female 50.5 Average Age 34.5 (range 11-70) Race/Ethnicity 61.6% Caucasian 13.7% African American 17.4% Hispanic 7.0% Other Level of Education (Adults) 13.6% Less than HS degree 28.1% HS graduate 30.0% Some college 28.3% College graduate Level of Education (School Age) 24.6% 5th through 8th grade 67.0% High School 8.4% Some College

Reliability and Validity Internal Consistency Standard Error of Measurement Test Re-test Inter-scorer Validity Face Validity Intercorrelations Equivalency (Print/Online, 4th/5th Edition) Convergent Validity Predictive Validity

Inter-Scorer Reliability Given that the SDS can be self-scored, it is important to examine how common errors occur 3.3% error rate by trained professional (using calculator) 10% error rate by trained professional (not using calculator)

Equivalence 4th and 5th Edition n = 60 r = .74 to .95 Print and Online Consistent with studies on 4th edition

Convergent Validity Career Interest Strong O*NET Interest Profiler Personality NEO Career Thoughts Career Thoughts Inventory

Predictive Validity

Predictive Validity Employed in position for 1+ years Unsatisfied = only 21% were found to have a high point code match between their job’s Holland Code and their SDS Summary Code Satisfied = twice as many people (42%) had a match Of the 1,739 standardization sample 1,441 reported aspirations 73% had an agreement score of 1 or better with their Summary Code and Aspiration Code

Administration and Scoring Options Payment Reports Print Traditional Manual Entry from form via iConnect SDS Website Group account Credit Card PO (CS) Volume Discount Individual Paypal Password Client Report only Report link sent to client (and group account admin.) iConnect iAdmins Client Report Professional Report Combo Report