A Differential Feature-Cost
Analysis of Seventeen Computer-Assisted Career Guidance Systems: Technical
Report Number 10
(Eighth Edition)
James P.
Sampson, Jr.
Robert C. Reardon
Corey Reed
Elisa Rudd
Jill Lumsden
Susan Epstein
Byron Folsom
Shawn Herbert
Stacey Johnson
Angela Simmons
Jeff Odell
Donna Rush
Laura Wright
Janet G. Lenz
Gary W. Peterson
Brian P. Greeno
Copyright 1998 by The Florida State University
All rights reserved
July 1998
Center for the
Study of Technology in Counseling and Career Development
University Center, Suite A4100, The Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306-2490
(850) 644-6431 (voice) (850) 644-3273 (FAX)
http://www.career.fsu.edu/techcenter/
James P. Sampson, Jr. is Professor in the Department of
Human Services and Studies, Robert C. Reardon is Professor and Director of
Instruction, Research, and Evaluation in the Career Center, Corey Reed is
Assistant Director of the Curricular-Career Information Service, Elisa Rudd and
Jill Lumsden are graduate students in the Department of Human Services and
Studies, Susan Epstein is Librarian of the Curricular-Career Information
Service; Byron Folsom, Shawn Herbert, Stacey Johnson, Angela Simmons, and Jeff
Odell are graduate students in the Department of Human Services and Studies,
Donna Rush is an Assistant Director of the Career Center and in charge of
Placement, Laura Wright is a graduate student in the Department of Human
Services and Studies, Janet G. Lenz is Associate Director for Career Advising,
Counseling, & Programming in the Career Center, Gary W. Peterson is
Professor in the Department of Human Services and Studies, and Brian P. Greeno
is a graduate student in the Department of Human Services and Studies, all at The
Florida State University. The first and
second authors also co-direct the Center for the Study of Technology in
Counseling and Career Development at The Florida State University. Appreciation is expressed to Dorothy
Domkowski, Michael A. Evans, Jeffrey W. Garis, Janet K. Humphreys, Robert W.
Kolodinsky, Michelle Radice, Kwabena T. Sankofa-Amammere, Denise E. Saunders
Caroline K. Wilde, M. LaWanna Slatten, and Scott J. Strausberger for their
contributions to previous editions of this analysis.
Current support for this analysis has been provided by the
National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee and The Florida State
University Career Center, College of Education, and Division of Student
Affairs. Previous support for this
analysis was provided by the American Counseling Association Foundation,
Barnett Banks of Florida, Inc., DANTES (Defense Activities for Non-Traditional
Education Support), the Florida Department of Education Bureau of Career
Development, The Florida State University Department of Human Services and
Studies, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services of the
United States Department of Education, and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Software and support materials have been made
available by the ACT, Inc, Career Development Systems, Career Dimensions,
Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc.,
COIN Educational Products, the Educational Testing Service, Hobsons Digital
Media, Inc., Peterson’s, the Riverside Publishing Company, and the University
of Oregon.
Table
of Contents
|
|
Page |
|
|
4 |
||
|
5 |
||
|
6 |
||
|
|
||
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
9 |
||
|
10 |
||
|
11 |
||
|
11 |
||
|
17 |
||
|
3 |
||
List
of Tables
|
|
|
Page |
|
Comparison of System Content |
17 |
|
|
Comparison of User Friendly
Features |
18 |
|
|
Comparison of Support Materials
and Services Available from Developers |
19 |
|
|
Comparison of Costs |
20 |
|
|
Availability of State-Specific
Occupational Information in CACG Systems |
21 |
|
|
CACG System Location, Data Base
Origin, and Language |
23 |
|
|
Contact Information for
Computer-Assisted Career Guidance System Developers |
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Differential Feature-Cost Analysis of Seventeen
Computer-Assisted Career Guidance Systems:
Technical Report Number 10 (8th Ed.)
The primary
purpose of this study is to highlight similarities and differences among
seventeen computer-assisted career guidance (CACG) systems so that
practitioners, CACG system developers, policy makers, and researchers may make
informed decisions concerning such systems.
The specific CACG systems included in this analysis are: 1) Career
& College Quest (Peterson’s, 1997), 2) Career Futures
(Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, 1997), 3) the Career Information
System (University of Oregon, 1997), 4) Career Perspectives
(Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc., 1997), 5) CareerView (Hobsons
Digital Media, Inc., 1997), 6) Career Visions (Career Development
Systems, LLC - Licensed from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1997), 7) Choices
(Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, 1997), 8) Choices CT [for Adults
in Career Transitions (Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, 1997)], 9) C-LECT
(Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc., 1997), 10) COIN Career Guidance
System (COIN Educational Products, 1997), 11) DISCOVER (Windows)
(ACT, Inc, 1997), 12) DISCOVER (DOS) (ACT, Inc, 1997), 13) DISCOVER
(CD-i) (ACT, Inc, 1997), 14) FOCUS II (Career Dimensions, Inc.,
1997), 15) GIS 3.0 (Guidance Information System) (Riverside Publishing
Company, 1994), 16) SIGI PLUS (Educational Testing Service, 1997), 17) VISIONS
PLUS (ACT, Inc, 1997). For the
purposes of this analysis, features include: 1) system content, 2) user
friendliness, and 3) support materials and services available from the
developer, while costs include: 1) license fees, and 2) support
materials. The data presented in this
analysis were gathered from CACG software use, support materials provided by
the developers, and telephone interviews with the developers. The integration of differential feature-cost
analyses into the process of software selection is also discussed. A secondary purpose of this study is to
provide a comprehensive description of the seventeen CACG systems included in
this analysis by: 1) identifying state, territory, and city-specific
availability of occupational information in the CACG systems, 2) identifying
the country location, geographic data base origin, and language for each
system, 3) identifying the developers of each system, and 4) identifying
further sources of information on the design and use of each CACG system (as
well as CACG systems in general).
Computer-assisted
career guidance (CACG) systems have become one of the most common comprehensive
counseling and guidance resources.1 Gati (1994) described CACG
systems as "an implementation of accumulated knowledge about career
information and guidance that facilitates better career decision making"
(p. 51). For the purposes of this paper,
a computer-assisted career guidance (CACG) system is defined as
a system of
interrelated computer-based components designed to facilitate self-assessment,
the generation of occupational and educational alternatives, and the use of
occupational, educational, and employment information. Such systems are often coupled with
counseling interventions and various print and media-based support resources,
and are used within an organization to assist individuals in making current
career decisions as well as improving their capacity to make effective career
decisions in the future (Sampson, 1994a).
An essential
element in evaluating the appropriateness of potential systems involves an
analysis of data on the effectiveness of CACG systems with different
populations using various counselor intervention strategies. The process of completing research and
evaluation studies is, however, a time-consuming process. It is not at all unusual to have research
appear in the literature on CACG system versions that are no longer
available. CACG systems are also
dynamic, in that revised or entirely new versions of software appear regularly
in response to user feedback and theoretical advances, as well as innovations
in computer software and hardware. [See
Reardon, Sampson, Ryan-Jones, Peterson, and Shahnasarian (1988), for a
discussion of the comparability of different versions of a single CACG
system]. These two problems, the time
lag in publishing research and evaluation studies and the rapid evolution of
CACG systems, necessitate a multidimensional approach to the software
evaluation process.
The use of a
differential feature-cost analysis offers a potential solution to the above
problems. A differential feature-cost
analysis allows the comparison of two or more CACG systems in terms of the
features available with respect to the costs involved. Gati (1990) stated, "a feature analysis
of the systems may be used to eliminate a particular system because of the
presence (or absence) of a critical undesirable (or necessary) feature"
(p. 122). For the purposes of this
analysis, features include 1) system content, 2) user friendliness, and
3) support materials and services available from the developer, while costs
include: 1) license fees, and 2) support materials. Because this type of analysis is limited to features and costs,
both of which are known at the time software is released, the findings can be
made available in a very timely fashion.
A differential
feature-cost analysis is best integrated into the planning phase of the
implementation process within an organization (Sampson, 1996) as follows:
1) Assess
current client and organizational needs;
2) Briefly
review a differential feature-cost analysis to become familiar with available
features;
3) Weigh the
importance of various features (Gati, 1990; Krumboltz, 1990; Oliver, 1990) and
cross out features that are not relevant in light of client and organizational
needs (Oliver, 1990) and cross out features that are constant across systems
(all receiving a "yes") (Jepsen, 1990);
1See Sampson and Reardon (1991) for a general examination of
trends and problems associated with CACG design and use, and Sampson (1994) for
an exploration of factors that facilitate and inhibit the design and use of
CACG systems. Comprehensive
recommendations for improving the design and use of CACG systems have been
proposed for North America (Sampson, Reardon & Lenz, 1991) and for Europe
(Banks & Watts, 1990; Weimer, 1992; Watts, 1997). Bibliographies are available that address CACG general issues
(Sampson & Reardon, 1998), ethical issues (Sampson, 1998), multicultural
issues (Sampson, Sankofa-Amammere, & Reardon, 1996), disability issues
(Sampson, Wilde, Slatten, & Reardon, 1996), and research and evaluation
(Sampson, Rudd, & Reardon, 1998).
4) Review a
differential feature-cost analysis to identify CACG systems that have
the potential to meet client needs within the context of the goals, theoretical
orientation, staff, and financial resources of the organization;
5) Evaluate
the software identified in the previous step in terms of potential
effectiveness in meeting current client and organizational needs by having
staff actually use the software, reviewing support materials from the
developer, reviewing documents that describe system use and evaluate system
effectiveness, discussing system use with staff and clients from other
organizations, and temporarily using the system with actual clients;2
and
6) Evaluate
the remaining software in terms of costs (Maze, 1985) and available financial
resources (Krumboltz, 1990).
"The interaction of CACG system
features and costs with varied client populations and organizational variables,
is too complex to allow one "best" system to exist for all situations
(Sampson & Reardon, 1990, p. 146).
As a result, the task of the practitioner is to ask the question:
"Given our client population, organizational structure, financial
resources, staff (time and skills), and historical/theoretical approach to
service delivery, which CACG system provides the features that we need at an
acceptable cost, and has been shown to be effective for clients under these
operating conditions?" (Sampson & Reardon, 1990, p. 146).
The primary
purpose of this study is to highlight similarities and differences among
seventeen computer-assisted career guidance systems, so that practitioners
may make more informed decisions concerning the adoption of such systems, CACG
system developers may more systematically present information about their
software, policy makers may monitor the developing scope of system
features and costs, and researchers may more fully describe CACG
treatment interventions in their studies.
The specific CACG systems included in this analysis are: 1) Career
& College Quest (Peterson’s, 1997), 2) Career Futures
(Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, 1997), 3) the Career Information
System (University of Oregon, 1997), 4) Career Perspectives
(Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc., 1997), 5) CareerView (Hobsons
Digital Media, Inc., 1997), 6) Career Visions (Career Development
Systems, LLC - Licensed from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1997), 7) Choices
(Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, 1997), 8) Choices CT [for Adults
in Career Transitions (Careerware: ISM Systems Corporation, 1997)], 9) C-LECT
(Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc., 1997), 10) COIN Career Guidance
System (COIN Educational Products, 1997), 11) DISCOVER (Windows)
(ACT, Inc, 1997), 12) DISCOVER (DOS) (ACT, Inc, 1997), 13) DISCOVER
(CD-i) (ACT, Inc, 1997), 14) FOCUS II (Career Dimensions, Inc.,
1997), 15) GIS 3.0 (Guidance Information System) (Riverside Publishing
Company, 1994), 16) SIGI PLUS (Educational Testing Service, 1997), 17) VISIONS
PLUS (ACT, Inc, 1997). A secondary
purpose of this study is to provide a comprehensive description of the
seventeen CACG systems included in this analysis by: 1) identifying state,
territory, and city-specific availability of occupational information in the
CACG systems, 2) identifying the country location, geographic data base origin,
and language for each system, 3) identifying the developers of each system, and
4) identifying further sources of information on the design and use of each
CACG system (as well as CACG systems in general).
2See Bridges (1987), Forrer (1987), Maze (1984), Maze (1989),
Maze and Cummings (1982), National Career Development Association (1991), and
Riesenberg (1984) for detailed descriptions of the software evaluation
process. Also see the Association of
Computer-Based Systems of Career Information (1992), Caulum and Lambert (1985),
American Counseling Association (1995), the National Career Development
Association (1991; 1997), the National Board for Certified Counselors (1997a;
1997b), and the American Psychological Association (1986) for national
standards on the development and use of CACG systems.
[1] The results from previous feature-cost analyses may be
found in Sampson, Peterson, Domkowski and Reardon (1986); Sampson, Peterson,
Reardon, Evans, and Domkowski (1989), Sampson et al., (1989; 1990; 1993; 1994;
1995; 1996).
CACG System
Selection Criteria
The following
criteria were used in selecting CACG systems for inclusion in this analysis: 1)
Provision of system components that address self-assessment, the generation of
occupational alternatives, and the delivery of occupational information; and
2) Use as a computer-based career information delivery system in more than one
state, territory, or city; or 3) Use in more than 500 sites in the
United States.
Establishment
of Features and Costs
Bloch and
Kinnison (1989), Harris-Bowlsbey (1983a; 1983b; 1984; 1985), Heppner and
Johnston (1985), Gati and Fassa (1997), Katz and Shatkin (1983), and McKinlay
(1984) suggested features which were used to develop system content
criteria. The criteria for user friendliness
were taken from the evaluation standard developed by Sampson and James (1984)
as well as features described by Heppner and Johnston (1985) and Bloch and
Kinnison (1989). The criteria for
support materials and services available from developers were derived by the
authors via discussions with system developers. Cost criteria were taken from Maze (1985) and discussions with
system developers.
This is the
eighth edition of CACG system feature-cost analyses completed at Florida State
University. With each subsequent
edition, additional CACG systems and features have been added. By adding additional CACG systems, as
suggested by Garcia and Plansker (1990), the analysis more accurately reflects
the current range of career guidance practice.
In the process of analyzing each CACG system for this study, the authors
chose to add new features to the analysis, and to subdivide earlier feature
categories to better reflect the contents of the seventeen systems.
An eleven
member research team was assembled to conduct this analysis. The research team met to review the previous
feature-cost analysis and the purposes of the present research. Each member of the research team agreed to
be the lead researcher for one or more systems. Each lead researcher used the features associated with their
respective system(s) and reviewed support materials available from the CACG
system developer(s). Telephone contacts
were used to clarify specific questions related to features. The research team then met as a group
several times to discuss common criteria for features and to suggest the
addition of new features or the deletion of previous features. In situations where different terminology
was used by developers to represent similar features, a "/" mark was
used to combine terms, e.g., work tasks/activities. After data collection was completed, a second researcher
independently verified the accuracy of the data recorded by the lead
researcher. After all feature tables were
complete, one researcher compiled cost data from telephone contacts with developers
or their representatives. A draft of
the report was then sent to the developers of each system to identify factual
errors and discuss the criteria for receiving a "yes" or
"no" for specific features in question. Factual errors were then corrected and developer comments were
taken into consideration by the authors in completing the analysis. The authors assume responsibility for the
quality of the analysis and related interpretations that are included in this
study.
While every
attempt has been made to be accurate, the reader should be aware of the
inherent limitations of any methodology.
First, the following analysis does not examine the effectiveness
or desirability of the features identified for the seventeen
systems. In considering effectiveness,
Jepsen (1990) stated:
The vast
amount of information included in the findings [3rd Edition of this
feature-cost-analysis] required some simplification. But the mere presence of a feature as part of any complex system
does not assure its effectiveness. By
analogy one would not always buy the auto with the most "whistles and
bells" rather than the one where the whistles actually made a difference,
as the warning devices telling the operator that the door is ajar or the signal
that your turning light is flashing.
Many competing sounds are a nuisance rather than a help. Likewise, too many CACG features are not
necessarily a sign of system strength (p. 130).
Krumboltz (1990) noted a similar
caution when he stated:
For example,
it is reported that there are videotapes for counselor training available in
five out the nine systems under review [3rd Edition of this
feature-cost-analysis]. A mechanical
use of these guidelines would give an equal weight to each of the five programs
for having such a videotape. However,
some of these videotapes must be superior to others in their creative artistry,
their ability to communicate effectively and their ability to maintain viewer
interest. The existence of a videotape
could be an advantage or a disadvantage depending on the quality of the tape
itself. Similarly, each of the other
features might be executed to different standards of excellence (p. 134).
With respect
to desirability, Gati (1990; 1994; 1996) cautions that CACG features
initially perceived as desirable may actually, upon more critical reflection,
be judged as unnecessary or detrimental in relation to good career guidance
practice. In view of the variability in
both the effectiveness and desirability of various features, the reader is strongly
encouraged to examine the CACG research and evaluation literature to ascertain
the relative merit of these features.
In order to help individuals locate appropriate literature on system
design and performance, system developers often provide system-specific
bibliographies upon request. Additional
system-specific bibliographies are available in the Appendix of this report as
follows: Career & College Quest (Sampson & Reardon, 1998), the Career
Information System (Sampson, Norris, Rush, & Reardon, 1998), CareerView
(Sampson & Reardon, 1998), Career Visions (Sampson, Norris, Barrett, &
Reardon, 1998), Choices (Sampson & Reardon, 1998), C-LECT (Sampson, Norris,
Diaz, & Reardon, 1998), COIN Career Guidance System (Sampson, Norris, Greeno,
& Reardon, 1998), DISCOVER (Sampson & Reardon, 1998), FOCUS II (Sampson
& Reardon, 1998), the Guidance
Information System (Sampson, Norris, Kinsley, & Reardon, 1998), and SIGI
PLUS (Sampson & Reardon, 1998).
A second
limitation involves the use of a "checklist" approach in presenting
the data. In an effort to present
feature data in a succinct manner, a dichotomous yes - no "checklist"
comparison of systems was used, i.e. "Feature X: Does System A have it? Does System B?" This approach effectively simplified a
massive amount of data. However,
potential problems occur when this methodology oversimplifies and obscures
reality. Certain features cannot be
adequately explained by this "yes" - "no" analysis. For example, the checklist indicates that
System A handles "understanding life-career roles" and System B does
not, while System B handles "issues related to child care" but System
A does not. These statements may be
true, but not fully informative. The
real point in these examples is that where System A concentrates more on
general concepts, System B offers more specific information on coping with new
life-career roles. The decision as to
which approach is "best" depends on typical client needs in a
particular setting as well as the theoretical orientation and assumptions of
staff members.
Also related
to the limitation of using a "checklist" approach, the awarding of a
"no" for any given system feature is not necessarily "bad"
and the awarding of a "yes" for any given system feature is not
necessarily "good." In some
cases a "no" may not indicate the lack of a relevant
system feature. For example, if a
system is not designed to use function keys, then a "yes" for having
an introductory orientation to function keys is irrelevant. Conversely, a "yes" may not indicate
the presence of a relevant system feature. For example, if the system uses a conceptual
schema for organizing the world-of-work that a professional views as
inappropriate, then a "yes" for this system feature is irrelevant.
Oliver (1990)
noted that the checklist approach taken in this feature-cost analysis, "is
a tool to be used in evaluating a CACG system for a specific population. Totaling the "yes" and
"no" items does not constitute an evaluation in and of itself"
(p. 139). Therefore, this comparative
analysis is not a "score sheet," but a preliminary guide for further
detailed consideration about whether a particular feature is important for a
given clientele. It is hoped that
although this method may blur a few trees, it can provide a useful map of the
forest.3
3For further discussion of methodological issues, see Garcia
and Plansker (1990), Gati (1990), Jepsen (1990), Krumboltz (1990), and Oliver
(1990) for critical reviews of the third edition of this feature-cost analysis
(Sampson, Reardon, Humphreys, Peterson, Evans, & Domkowski, 1990) and
Sampson and Reardon (1990b) for a rejoinder and a discussion of implications
for practitioners, researchers, CACG system developers, and public policy
makers.
The results of
the analysis are provided in a series of Tables. Tables 1 through 4 provide data on fifteen CACG systems used in
high school, college, employment service, vocational-technical school, library,
rehabilitation, correctional, and military settings: Table 1 includes system content; Table 2 includes user friendliness; Table 3 includes support materials and services
available from the developer; and Table 4 includes costs. Table 5 identifies state, territory, and
city-specific availability of occupational information in the CACG systems,
including official governmental designation as a computer-based career
information delivery system (CIDS).5 Table 6 identifies the country location, geographic
data base origin, and language for the CACG systems included in this
report. Table 7 provides the contact information for CACG
system developers to assist the reader in continuing the evaluation
process. The Appendix contains two
bibliographic collections on computer-assisted career guidance. The first collection of bibliographies
identifies sources of information on the theoretical and research foundations,
evaluation and research reports, program descriptions, and support materials
associated with the CACG systems included in this differential feature-cost
analysis. The second collection of
bibliographies identifies sources of information on general, ethical,
multicultural, and disability issues, and research data, associated with the
design and use of CACG systems.
While acknowledging
the value of adding more qualitative, outcome-oriented judgments to increase
the utility of this analysis for software selection, such an effort is beyond
the practical scope and resources available for this study. The present analysis is intended to provide
a foundation for subsequent, more comprehensive evaluations of CACG systems.
4The results from previous feature-cost analyses may be found
in Sampson, Peterson, Domkowski and Reardon (1986); Sampson, Peterson, Reardon,
Evans, and Domkowski (1989), Sampson et al., (1989; 1990; 1993; 1994; 1995;
1996).
5Lester and Ollis (1988) defined CIDS as,
"computer-based resources that provide information on occupations and
related education and training opportunities" (p. 205). Hopkins, Kinnison, Morgenthau, and Ollis
(1992) stated that CIDS, "provide useful information for people who are
exploring, planning, or making decisions about careers. CIDS contain national, state, and local
information about occupations, educational and training institutions and
programs, and related subjects. . . . Most of these systems are computer-based,
but other media are also used to provide information. Tabloid newspapers and telephone hotlines, for example, can reach
people in areas without access to computerized systems" (p. 1).
In drawing
conclusions from Tables 1 through 4, it is important to consider the following
caveats. First, CACG system features
vary considerably in perceived importance among practitioners, CACG system
developers, policy makers, and researchers.
The capacity to identify occupational alternatives by different key
variables, the inclusion of different categories of occupational and
educational information, or the inclusion of an integrated decision-making
process that guides an individual's use of the system, could each be valued
very differently among professionals.
Second, CACG system costs vary considerably according to base price
and pricing structure. Variations
in discounts for leasing more than one copy of the software, discounts for multi-year leases, the option
for using software on multiple computers at one institution at no additional cost, multiple institution software discounts,
state-wide software discounts, and unit costs of nonconsumable and consumable
support materials may have considerable impact on the ultimate costs over time. Decisions regarding CACG system adoption
should be based on a careful analysis of the interaction of features,
costs, and the context for implementation of the system. The context for implementation could include
the mission of the organization, theoretical assumptions of counseling and
guidance, staff competencies, and the size of the organization. The findings of this report can be a
starting point for making decisions about CACG adoption.
As shown in
Table 5, seven of the seventeen CACG systems examined in this study provide
state-specific occupational information.
In many cases, State Occupational Information Coordinating Committees
(SOICCs) have recognized the efforts of a CACG system developer to provide
state-specific information by designating a CACG system as the official CIDS
for that state (or territory/city).
Even when a SOICC has recognized one system, other CACG system
developers have still often made the effort to provide state-specific
information. It appears that many CACG
system developers have made a strong commitment to providing state-specific
information in a variety of states.
Table 6
indicates that the use of the seventeen CACG systems included in this analysis
is beginning to spread beyond the original countries of origin. It would appear that CACG systems are
steadily becoming an international resource for the delivery of career guidance
services. The international
availability of CACG systems and CACG system data bases has the potential to
further encourage the development of a global economy by facilitating the
education, training, and employment of individuals across national borders.
The Appendix
contains a substantial amount of literature on the CACG systems included in
this differential feature-cost analysis and on systems in general. An obvious relationship can be observed
between the length of time that a system has been in operation and the amount
of system-specific literature that is available. A well developed literature base for a specific system shows
consistent evidence of: 1) system developer involvement in documenting the
evolving theoretical and research foundations of a system and in creating
appropriate support materials, and 2) an effort by system developers, followed
by subsequent independent efforts of researchers and practitioners, to
establish the efficacy of system use with various populations in different
settings. Given the major design
changes that occur among CACG systems every five to ten years, the literature
for a system needs to keep pace with system evolution. A review of bibliographies on CACG general,
ethical, multicultural, and disability issues, and research data, shows that
substantial work has been accomplished in anticipating and reacting to aspects
of CACG design and use that can impact system effectiveness. The regular pace of system evolution
requires that these issues be reevaluated on an ongoing basis. For example, the emerging use of multimedia
and artificial intelligence components within CACG systems will require a
reevaluation of human and computer roles, implementation processes, and
research and evaluation approaches, as well as ethical, multicultural, and
disability issues. Finally, care needs
to be taken in the effective dissemination of the literature contained in all
of the above bibliographies. Busy
practitioners, system developers, and researchers need quick and easy access to
appropriate information. By better
understanding previous efforts, best practices in CACG design and use may be
emulated and costly mistakes may be avoided.
Identifying the existing CACG literature on an ongoing basis is a
necessary first step in this process.
Hopefully, by
making it easier to examine the features and costs of CACG systems,
professionals will be both better motivated and more capable of
dealing with the complex evaluative considerations that undergird the selection
of CACG systems for specific purposes and settings. The ultimate effectiveness of this feature-cost analysis,
therefore, can be measured by the willingness of professionals to commit the
time and energy to move beyond basic surface-level evaluations to more
theory-based, context-specific, comprehensive evaluations of CACG system
performance. The ultimate beneficiaries
of such an effort would be the millions of adolescents and adults who seek
assistance each year in making career choices (Sampson & Reardon, 1990).
ACT, Inc.
(1997). DISCOVER (CD-i) [Computer software]. Hunt Valley, MD: Author.
ACT, Inc.
(1997). DISCOVER (DOS) [Computer software]. Hunt Valley, MD: Author.
ACT, Inc.
(1997). DISCOVER (Windows) [Computer software]. Hunt Valley, MD: Author.
ACT, Inc.
(1997). VISIONS Plus [Computer software]. Hunt Valley, MD: Author.
American
Counseling Association. (1995). Code of ethics and standards of practice.
Alexandria, VA: Author.
American
Psychological Association. (1986). Guidelines for computer-based tests and
interpretations. Washington, DC: Author.
Association of
Computer-Based Systems for Career Information. (1992). Handbook of standards
for the operation of computer-based career information systems. Alexandria,
VA: Author, ACSCI Administrative Office, National Career Development
Association.
Banks, J. A.
G., & Watts, A. G. (1990). Conclusions and recommendations. In J. P.
Sampson, Jr. & R. C. Reardon (Eds.), Enhancing the design and use of
computer-assisted career guidance systems: Proceedings of an international
teleconference on technology and career development (pp. 110-112).
Alexandria, VA: National Career Development Association.
Bloch, D. P.,
& Kinnison, J. F. (1989). A method for rating computer-based career
information delivery systems. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 21, 177-187.
Bridges, M.
(1987). Resources to find and evaluate counseling software. Career Planning
and Adult Development Journal, 3 (2), 34-42.
Career
Development Systems, LLC - Licensed from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
(1997). Career Visions [Computer software]. Madison, WI: Center on Education
and Work.
Career
Dimensions, Inc. (1997). FOCUS II [Computer software]. Center Harbor, NH:
Author.
Careerware:
ISM Systems Corporation. (1997). Choices [Computer software]. Ottawa, Ontario:
Author.
Careerware:
ISM Systems Corporation. (1997). Choices CT (for Adults in Career Transitions)
[Computer software]. Ottawa, Ontario: Author.
Careerware:
ISM Systems Corporation. (1997). Career Futures [Computer software]. Ottawa,
Ontario: Author.
Caulum, D.,
& Lambert, R. (Eds.). (1985). Guidelines for the use of computer-based
career information and guidance systems. Eugene, OR: Association of Computer-Based Systems for
Career Information, University of Oregon.
Chronicle
Guidance Publications, Inc. (1997). Career Perspectives [Computer software].
Moravia, NY: Author.
Chronicle
Guidance Publications, Inc. (1997). C-LECT [Computer software]. Moravia, NY:
Author.
COIN
Educational Products (1997). COIN Career Guidance System [Computer software].
Toledo, OH: Author.
Educational
Testing Service. (1997). SIGI PLUS [Computer software]. Princeton, NJ: Author.
Forrer, S. E.
(1987). Evaluating career development software. Career Planning and Adult
Development Journal, 3 (2), 31-33.
Garcia, G.,
Jr., & Plansker, C. M. (1990). A reaction to an analysis of nine
computer-assisted career guidance systems. Journal of Career Development,
17, 113-117.
Gati, I.
(1990). The contribution of differential feature-cost analysis to the
evaluation of computer-assisted career guidance systems: A comment on Sampson,
Reardon, Humphreys, Peterson, Evans, and Domkowski (1990). Journal of Career
Development, 17, 119-128.
Gati, I.
(1994). Computer-assisted career counseling: Dilemmas, problems, and possible
solutions. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 51-56.
Gati, I.
(1996). Computer-assisted career counseling: Challenges and prospects. In M. L. Savickas & B. W. Walsh (Eds.). Integrating
career theory and practice. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Gati, I.,
& Fassa, N. (1997). Evaluating computer-assisted career guidance systems:
The role of career counselors. Career Planning and Adult Development
Journal, 13, 63-74.
Harris-Bowlsbey,
J. (1983a). The computer and the decider. The Counseling Psychologist, 11,
9-14.
Harris-Bowlsbey,
J. (1983b). A historical perspective. In C. S. Johnson (Ed.), Microcomputers
and the school counselor (pp. 1-16). Alexandria, VA: American School
Counselor Association.
Harris-Bowlsbey,
J. (1984). The computer and career development. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 63, 145-148.
Harris-Bowlsbey,
J. (1985). Systematic career guidance and computer-based systems. In z. b. Leibowitz, & H. D. Lea
(Eds.), Adult career development: Concepts, issues and practices (pp.
95-107). Alexandria, VA: American Association for Counseling and Development.
Heppner, M.
J., & Johnston, J. A. (1985). Computerized career guidance and information
systems: Guidelines for selection. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26,
156-163.
Hobsons
Digital Media, Inc. (1997). CareerView [Computer software]. Cincinnati, OH:
Author.
Hopkins, V.,
Kinnison, J., Morgenthau, E., & Ollis, H. (1992). Career information
delivery systems: A summary status report (NOICC Occasional paper No. 4).
Washington, D.C.: National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee.
Jepsen, D. A.
(1990). A useful but limited consumer's guide. Journal of Career Development,
17, 129-132.
Katz, M. R.,
& Shatkin, L. (1983). Characteristics of computer-assisted guidance. The
Counseling Psychologist, 11 (4), 15-31.
Krumboltz, J.
D. (1990). Evaluating computer-assisted career guidance programs. Journal of
Career Development, 17, 133-136.
Lester, J. N.,
& Ollis, H. T. (1988). Future challenges to career information providers: A
NOICC perspective. Journal of Career Development, 14, 205-215.
Maze, M.
(1984). How to select a computerized guidance system. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 63, 158-161.
Maze, M.
(1985). How much should a computerized guidance program cost? Journal of
Career Development, 12, 157-160.
Maze, M.
(1989). How to evaluate and select software. In G. R. Walz, J. C. Bleuer, &
M. Maze (Eds.), Counseling software guide: A resource for the guidance and
human development professions (pp. 5-7). Alexandria, VA: American
Association of Counseling and Development.
Maze, M.,
& Cummings, R. (1982). How to select a computer-assisted career guidance
system. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Vocational Studies
Center.
McKinlay, B.
(1984). Standards of quality in systems of career information. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 63, 149-152.
National Board
for Certified Counselors. (1997a). Code of Ethics. Greensboro, NC:
Author.
National Board
for Certified Counselors and the Council for Credentialing and Education.
(1997b). Standards for the ethical practice of webcounseling.
Greensboro, NC: Author.
National
Career Development Association. (1991). Ethical standards. In D. Engels (Ed.), The
professional practice of career counseling and consultation: A resource
document (2nd ed.) (pp. 11-17). Alexandria, VA: Author.
National
Career Development Association. (1991). Career software review guidelines.
Alexandria, VA: Author.
National
Career Development Association. (1997). NCDA guidelines for the use of the
Internet for provision of career information and planning services.
Columbus, OH: Author.
Oliver, L. W.
(1990). Evaluating computer-assisted career guidance systems: A critique of the
differential feature-cost approach. Journal of Career Development, 17,
137-141.
Peterson’s
(1997). Career & College Quest [Computer software]. Princeton, NJ: Author.
Reardon, R.
C., Sampson, J. P., Jr., Ryan-Jones, R. E., Peterson, G. W., &
Shahnasarian, M. (1988). A comparative analysis of the impact of two
generations of a computer-assisted career guidance system - SIGI and SIGI PLUS
(Technical Report No. 7). Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University, Center
for the Study of Technology in Counseling and Career Development.
Riesenberg, B.
(1984). Considerations in the selection of a computerized guidance system. In
C. S. Johnson (Ed.), Microcomputers and the school counselor (pp.
17-29). Alexandria, VA: American School Counselor Association.
Riverside
Publishing Company. (1997). GIS 3.0 (GUIDANCE INFORMATION SYSTEM) [Computer
software]. Chicago, IL: Author.
Sampson, J.
P., Jr. (1995). Computer-assisted career guidance: Ethical issues
bibliography. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University, Center for the
Study of Technology in Counseling and Career Development.
Sampson, J.
P., Jr. (1996). Effective computer-assisted career guidance: Occasional
paper number 2 (2nd ed.). Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University, Center
for the Study of Technology in Counseling and Career Development.
Sampson, J.
P., Jr. (1994). Factors influencing the effective use of computer-assisted
careers guidance: The North American experience. British Journal of Guidance
& Counseling, 22, 91-106.
Sampson, J.
P., Jr., & James, J. E. (1984). Human factors evaluation standard.
Unpublished manuscript, Florida State University, Clearinghouse for
Computer-Assisted Guidance Systems, Tallahassee, FL.