Holland’s
Theory and Implications for Academic Advising and Career Counseling
Technical Report 38[1]
by
Robert
Reardon, Ph.D.
Professor
and Program Director
Emily
Bullock, MS
Career
Advisor
Dunlap Success Center
100 S. Woodward Avenue
The
Florida State University
Tallahassee,
FL 32306-4162
January
20, 2004
Holland’s
Theory and Implications for Academic Advising and Career Counseling
John Holland’s typological theory of persons and environments is regarded as the most influential in the field of career counseling (Brown, 2002), but this has not carried over to the field of higher education and academic advising (Smart, Feldman, & Ethington, 2000). This conundrum led us to explore whether or not Holland’s theory and research were relevant and could shed light on the behavior and organization of college faculty and students, which could ultimately improve the effectiveness of academic advising and career counseling. This article summarizes the results of our exploration. Holland’s person-environment interaction theory is especially important to scholars and practitioners in education and psychology. “John Holland pioneered in assessing the environments of colleges and universities and their influence on students. His research has been central in the development of knowledge about nonacademic accomplishments. His theory of vocational personalities and work environments revolutionized the delivery of vocational assistance worldwide. He made contributions to research on originality and interpersonal competence” (G. Gottfredson, 1999, p. 15). Another reviewer noted, “Research on his theory is voluminous and unabating. His theoretical insights are now at the center of any comprehensive review . . .. The widespread use of his inventories is huge. . . .” (Borgen, 1991, pp. 275-276).
As
colleges and universities have grown in size, scope, and organizational
complexity, some students have found it difficult to find a “home” (Astin,
1984). While students may identify with a student organization, residence hall,
or activity program, we believe that the academic department is the entity
where students are likely to find important mentors, peers, involvement,
direction, and inspiration. Academic departments have an inherent, varied
mixture of characteristics that are created by the interests and behaviors of
the faculty. If students can recognize, differentiate, and understand these
diverse academic environments and the faculty who dominate them with respect to
Holland’s theoretical model, we believe they are more likely to find a place
within the university that will increase their satisfaction, involvement, and
persistence.
In
this article, we begin by examining several aspects of academic advising and
career counseling services for students. These include definitions, the need
for theory-based approaches in advising research and practice, and Holland’s
current and potential contributions to this field. We then examine Holland’s
theory and the findings from more than 20 studies by Smart and others (Smart et
al., 2000) of college faculty and students in academic departments. We conclude
with the presentation of a practical approach for integrating a Holland-based
system of academic advising and career counseling. We believe this
service-delivery model provides some novel ideas and procedures for enhancing
this important area of student services.
Although
the terms academic advising and career counseling are familiar, it is important
to define them as they are used in this article. Ender, Winston, and Miller
(1984) defined developmental academic advising as “a systematic process
based on a close student-advisor relationship intended to aid students in
achieving educational, career, and personal goals through the utilization of
the full range of institutional and community resources” (p. 19). Later,
Creamer (2000) defined it as “an educational activity that depends on valid
explanations of complex student behaviors and institutional conditions to
assist college students in making and executing educational and life plans” (p.
18).
Sears
(1982) defined career counseling as “a one-to-one or small group
relationship between a client and a counselor with the goal of helping the
client(s) integrate and apply an understanding of self and the environment to
make the most appropriate career decisions and adjustments” (p. 139). She
further defined career as “the totality of work one does in his/her lifetime”
(p. 139) and work as “conscious effort, other than that having as its primary
purpose either coping or relaxation, aimed at producing benefits for oneself
and/or for oneself and others” (p. 142).
The
distinctions between academic advising and career counseling are primarily a
matter of scope and emphasis. Academic advising is more narrowly focused on
college and university students and life/career decision making related to
curricular and co-curricular activities. Career counseling is a broader, more
comprehensive term not limited to educational settings. However, both functions
involve a process of individual or small group interventions to help persons
use information to make educational and occupational decisions that are
consistent with their personal goals, values, interests, and skills. We believe
that a theory that informs career counseling, such as John Holland’s RIASEC
theory, can also inform academic advising.
Holland’s
typological theory (Holland, 1997) specifies a theoretical connection between
personality and environment that makes it possible to use the same RIASEC
classification system for both persons and fields of study or occupations. Many
inventories and career assessment tools use the typology to enable individuals
to categorize their interests and personal characteristics in terms of
combinations of the six types:
Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, or
Conventional. These six types are briefly defined in Table 1.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert
Table 1 Descriptions of Holland Types about here
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
According
to RIASEC theory, if a person and an environment have the same or similar
codes, e.g., Investigative person in an Investigative environment, then the
person will likely be satisfied and persist in that environment (Holland,
1997). This satisfaction will result from individuals being able to express
their personality in an environment that is supportive and includes other
persons who have the same or similar personality traits. It should be noted
that neither people nor environments are exclusively one type but rather
combinations of all six types. Their dominant type is an approximation of an
ideal, modal type. The profile of the six types can be described in terms of
the degree of differentiation (flat or uneven profile), consistency (level of
similarity of interests or characteristics on the RIASEC hexagon for the first
two letters of a three-letter Holland code), or identity (stability
characteristics of the type). Each of these factors moderates predictions about
the behavior related to the congruence level between a person and an
environment. Persons and environments are typically described proportionally in
terms of the most highly weighted three of the six Holland types, e.g., Lawyer,
ESI; Accounting, CEI.
The
environments of college campuses, fields of study, work positions, and
occupations can also be classified using the RIASEC system (G. Gottfredson
& Holland, 1996). Holland’s early efforts with the National Merit
Scholarship Corporation (NMSC) and the American College Testing Program enabled
him to look at colleges and academic disciplines as environments. It is
important to note that RIASEC theory had its roots in higher education and
later focused on occupations. However, almost any social setting, e.g., a
family-owned business, a classroom, or a work group, might be characterized in
terms of a RIASEC environment. Every aspect of the theory can be applied to
different kinds of environments.
L.
S. Gottfredson and Richards (1999) traced the history of Holland’s efforts to
classify educational and occupational environments. Holland initially studied
the numbers of incumbents in a particular environment to classify occupations
or colleges, but he later moved to study the characteristics of the environment
independent of the persons in it. College catalogs and descriptions of academic
disciplines were among the public records used to study institutional
environments. Astin and Holland (1961) developed the Environmental Assessment
Technique (EAT) while at the NMSC as a method for measuring college
environments.
Success
in measuring faculty and the curriculum led Richards to explore differences in
environments in Japanese (Richards, 1973) and British Commonwealth universities
(Richards, 1974), U. S. law schools (Richards, 1987b), and Historically Black
colleges (Richards, 1987a). For example, Richards found that Japanese
universities placed less emphasis on the Artistic area and more on the
Realistic area than U.S. universities. The most recent instruments for
measuring environments are the Position Classification Inventory (PCI; G.
Gottfredson & Holland, 1991), a direct theory-based measure of occupational
environments, and the Environmental Identity Scale (EIS; Holland, 1997). These
instruments make it possible to study college faculty directly and thus advance
the study of academic disciplines and their effects on college students.
Those
who study or provide services to college students need to understand the
importance of Holland’s RIASEC theory. For example, Day and Rounds (1998)
reported that the RIASEC typology was used similarly by ethnically diverse
groups of U.S. students to organize information about their interests and
options. This means that varied cultural subgroups in the United States have a
sufficiently common social and educational experience that RIASEC theory and
related practical applications can be applied to almost everyone. More
recently, Tracey and Darcy (2002) found that college students whose schema for
organizing information about interests and occupations differed from Holland’s
RIASEC structure had less career certainty and more career indecision. This
finding suggests that the RIASEC hexagon may have a normative benefit regarding
the classification of occupations and fields of study.
Scholars
have used Holland’s theory to study vocational behavior (G. Gottfredson, 1999)
and industrial and organizational behavior (Muchinsky, 1999), but this is not
as true for higher education scholars. We searched the Journal of College
Student Development (JCSD), the NACADA Journal, and the NASPA
Journal from 1994-2002 for articles on academic advising or educational
planning that were based on Holland’s theory. We found no relevant publications
in the NACADA or NASPA Journals and one in JCSD
that examined Holland’s RIASEC typology in relation to college students.
Another example of inattention is Creamer’s (2000) chapter, “Use of Theory in
Academic Advising,” which extolled the benefits of theory-based advising while
providing a cursory reference to Holland’s 1973 book rather than the 1997
edition. Smart et al. (2000)
found only a handful of Holland citations in a search of the Journal of
Higher Education, Research in Higher Education, Higher Education,
and The Review of Higher Education. Smart et al. further noted that the
lack of a theory base is a major impediment to attaining accurate knowledge
concerning academic disciplines, which led Smart et al. to conduct a major
national study of college faculty and students based on Holland’s theory. We
discuss this research and other related studies in the following section.
Holland-Based Research on College Students and Faculty
When
Holland’s theory is used to classify occupations, the distribution across the
six RIASEC categories varies in relation to the level of cognitive skill and
ability required by the occupation. In other words, occupations differ
according to level. G. Gottfredson and Holland (1996) created a Complexity
Rating (Cx) to estimate the cognitive skill and ability associated with an
occupation. A Cx rating of 65 or higher is associated with an occupation
requiring a college degree and possibly post-graduate work and on-the-job
training of 4-10 years, while a Cx level of 50 might characterize an occupation
requiring a high school degree and a year or more of on the job training. For
example, the Cx rating for Nuclear-Fuels Research Engineer (IRC) is 80 while
Shoe Shiner (CRE) is 37 and Counselor (SAE) is 68.
College
level occupations are least frequently associated with the Conventional and
Realistic categories, while Investigative and Artistic work are most likely
associated with college level employment or the highest level of cognitive
ability. Reardon, Vernick, and Reed (in press) reported the estimated mean Cx
ratings across the six kinds of work were Realistic = 52; Investigative = 72;
Artistic = 69; Social = 63; Enterprising = 60; and Conventional = 55, revealing
a profile rating for the six kinds of work in order of highest to lowest as IASECR.
Similarly, Smart et al. (2000) found few college majors, faculty, or students
in their samples categorized as Realistic or Conventional, which led them to
exclude these two areas from their research. The fact that most college
disciplines are concentrated in Holland’s Investigative, Artistic, Social, and
Enterprising areas has important implications for students exploring
educational options.
The incorporation of the
concept of cognitive level, along with interests and personality
characteristics, into academic advising and career counseling in relation to
Holland’s theory will require considerable attention by professionals in these
areas. Occupations and fields of study differ not only according to interests
but also the degree of cognitive ability and skill required. Advisors and
counselors are sometimes reluctant to broach this matter with students (L. S.
Gottfredson, 2003). However, Holland’s theory provides some tools to help in
this undertaking, and these can be useful in improving advising and counseling
services.
Smart et al. (2000) classified academic
disciplines in terms of Holland’s RIASEC Theory using the Educational
Opportunities Finder (Rosen, Holmberg, & Holland, 1994), and the
results are shown in Table 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert
Table 2 Academic Disciplines by Holland Codes about here
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smart et
al. (2000) did not classify agriculture, forestry, or education (including
administration and counseling) in terms of RIASEC Theory because of a lack of
relevant data, and they excluded Realistic and Conventional disciplines from
their study because of the small numbers of college faculty and students in
these disciplines. Realistic disciplines included industrial arts, military
science, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, marine science,
drafting/design, and Conventional disciplines included accounting, secretarial
studies, data processing.
Smart, Feldman, and Ethington (2000)
examined longitudinal data over a four-year period of study (1986-1990) on
approximately 2,309 college students participating in the Cooperative
Institutional Research Program (CIRP; Higher Education Research Institute, 1986).
They found that the number of students in the Enterprising environment over
four years remained relatively stable (21% to 22%), and smaller changes
occurred in the Investigative and Artistic environments, 25% to 29% and 8% to
15%, respectively. However, students in the Social environment increased from
22% to 34%, the largest area of change. Smart et al. noted that about 22% of
the students had freshman majors that were undecided, not classified, or
associated with Realistic or Conventional academic environments.
The
research of Smart et al. (2000) was based on two ideas. First, “faculty create
academic environments inclined to require, reinforce, and reward the
distinctive patterns of abilities and interests of students in a manner
consistent with Holland’s theory” (p. 96). Second, “ students are not passive
participants in the search for academic majors and careers; rather, they
actively search for and select academic environments that encourage them to
develop further their characteristic interests and abilities and to enter (and
be successful in) their chosen career fields” (p. 52). In the following
paragraphs, we summarize findings relevant to these two ideas.
Smart et al. (2000) sought to discover whether
or not changes in students over four years were the result of their experiences
in their major fields of study (academic discipline). They reasoned that
faculty chose to be in academic environments, e.g., academic departments,
because of their preferences and values regarding the goals of undergraduate
education and their preferred ways of socializing students. Smart et al. held
that faculty are the primary representatives of academic environments and the
primary contributors to behavior patterns of students who choose those
environments as majors.
Smart et al. (2000) presented evidence from the
literature and their own research concerning the way academic departments
socialize students. They reported that “faculty members in different clusters
of academic disciplines create distinctly different academic environments as a
consequence of their preference for alternative goals for undergraduate
education, their emphasis on alternative teaching goals and student
competencies in their respective classes, and their reliance on different
approaches to classroom instruction and ways of interacting with students
inside and outside their classes” (p. 238). Furthermore, these environments
“have a strong socializing influence on change and the stability of students’
abilities and interests—that is, what students do and do not learn or acquire
as a consequence of their collegiate experiences (p. 238).”
Faculty
in Investigative, Artistic, Social, and Enterprising disciplines create
academic environments in a manner consistent with Holland’s theory (Smart et
al., 2000). Moreover, these environments were the primary contributors to
differential patterns of change and stability in students, irrespective of
students’ personality types, e.g., Artistic student in a Social environment. Smart et al. (2000) noted that “the degree to
which academic environments are ‘successful’ in their efforts to socialize
students to their respective patterns of abilities and interests thus appears
to be differ considerably, with Artistic and Investigative environments being
the most ‘successful’ and the Social and Enterprising environments being less
‘successful’ (p. 146).” Overall, Smart et al. concluded that the socialization
assumption of Holland’s theory was supported. These findings have important implications
for academic advising that are explored later in this paper.
Thus far, we have
concentrated our analysis on the impact of four disciplines in socializing
students toward the development of interests and skills predicted by Holland’s
(1997) typological theory. But what about the personal choices made by students
in selecting a discipline? In order to study this phenomenon, Smart et al.
(2000) classified students as primary or secondary recruits. Primary recruits
were defined as students initially selecting a discipline and staying in that
field over four years. Secondary recruits were those in a different major in
the fourth year.
Regarding primary
recruits, 2/3s of freshmen initially selecting majors in the Social area
remained in that area over four years, while conversely slightly more than half
of the students in the Enterprising area persisted over four years. Students in
the Artistic and Investigative areas both persisted over four years at 64%.
Overall, about 2/3s of freshmen persisted in one of the four disciplines initially selected, and 1/3 changed to
another area. Regarding the secondary recruits (those in a different major
after four years), the question might be asked, “Where did they go?” Given that
students initially entering the Social area were most likely to persist in that
area, the students in the Investigative, Artistic, an Enterprising areas were
most frequently secondary recruits to the Social area (about 19% for each of
them).
When environments (percentage
of seniors in each of the four areas) rather than entering students were
examined, Smart et al. (2000) found that from 1/3 to 1/2 of the four
environments were composed of primary recruits, and about half of the sample
were secondary recruits, e.g., the seniors who had changed their majors. This
means that almost half the seniors ended up in a discipline that was different
from their initial choice. This was most notable in the Artistic environment
where 2/3 of the students were secondary recruits from one of the other areas
and did not intend to major in the Artistic area in their freshman year. About
1/3 of the students migrating into the Social area came from Investigative,
Enterprising, or undecided areas. Students moving into the Investigative area
were most likely to come from the Enterprising area, and vice versa. These data
reveal the fluid nature of students’ major selections and the heterogeneous
nature of the four environments with respect to the students’ initial major
preferences.
The
specific findings of Smart et al. (2000) regarding the impact of socialization
for the four discipline environments with respect to student personality
characteristics are summarized below. The variability in the socialization
styles and the effects of the environments, as well as how socialization
effected the student’s congruence with the environments are described. It will
be recalled that a high level match between the person and the environment, e.g.,
Investigative person in Investigative major, indicates high congruence.
Faculty
in Investigative environments place primary attention on developing
analytical, mathematical, and scientific competencies, with little attention
given to character and career development. They rely more than other faculty on
formal and structured teaching-learning, they are subject-matter centered, and
they have specific course requirements. They focus on examinations and grades.
This environment has the highest percentage of primary recruits. All students
in Investigative environments increased their abilities and interests in this
area, and this was even stronger if they were Investigative students at entry
(primary recruits). Investigative students in disciplines outside of the
Investigative environment did not increase their abilities and skills in the
Investigative area.
Artistic
environments focus on aesthetics and an emphasis on emotions, sensations, and
the mind. The curriculum stresses learning about literature and the arts, as
well as becoming a creative thinker. Faculty also emphasize character
development, along with student freedom and independence in learning. Varied
instructional strategies are used. About two-thirds of students in the Artistic
environment did not anticipate majoring in the Artistic environment when they
entered college. Artistic type students were not more likely to initially
select a major in this environment. On the other hand, Artistic students
majoring in Artistic environments did have stronger interests and abilities in
this area. Students majoring in Artistic environments did show large increases
in Artistic abilities and interests, and this was true for both primary and
secondary recruits. Artistic personalities not majoring in Artistic environments
did not increase their self-rated interests and abilities over four years.
Social
environments have a strong community orientation characterized by friendliness
and warmth. Like the Artistic environment, faculty place value on developing a
historical perspective of the field and an emphasis on student values and
character development. Unlike the Artistic environment, faculty also place
value on humanitarian, teaching, and interpersonal competencies. Colleagueship
and student independence and freedom are supported, and informal small group
teaching is employed. The socialization effect of the environment was the
smallest of the four areas studied and the effects were muddled by gender.
Small increases were recorded for Social students in Social environments, but
these were not much different from those for Social students in other
environments. Social disciplines seem to have the least impact and Social
students reported the least gains in related interests and abilities. Stated
another way, the Social environments appear to be the most accepting and least
demanding of the four environments studied by Smart et al. (2000).
The
Enterprising environment has a strong orientation to career preparation
and status acquisition. Faculty focus on leadership development, the
acquisition and use of power to attain career goals, and striving for common
indicators of organizational and career success. Teaching strategies in this
environment are very balanced, but faculty like most to work with
career-oriented students regarding specialized matters. Enterprising students
tended to select Enterprising environments, and in this environment they
increased their Enterprising abilities and interests. This was also true for
non-Enterprising students in the Enterprising environment. Enterprising
students not majoring in Enterprising environments did not increase their
self-rated Enterprising abilities and interests.
In
summary, it is apparent that congruent students in Investigative, Artistic, and
Enterprising environments increased their pattern of self-reported interests
and abilities over four years by further developing what was already present in
their personality. These three environments also increased these related traits
for incongruent students, but the gap between the congruent and incongruent
students did not decrease over time. In other words, students in both congruent
and incongruent environments made equivalent or parallel changes in
self-reported abilities and interests over four years, but students in congruent
environments had higher levels of interests and abilities at the end of four
years. Investigative and Enterprising environments had the most impact on
student characteristics. These findings, if communicated to students in
academic advising, could potentially change the nature of discussions about
students’ educational goals in college.
Implications for Advising and Counseling
Sampson,
Reardon, Peterson and Lenz (2004) categorized human services interventions into
three levels, (1) self-help, (2) brief staff-assisted, and (3) individual
case-managed services. Holland’s RIASEC theory and related materials are
sufficiently complex and varied to complement this service delivery model.
Peterson, Sampson, and Lenz (2003) explained how the concept of student
readiness for learning in college could be implemented in academic advising and
career counseling programs. We use Holland’s theory and materials to illustrate
the implementation of this idea.
Self-help
services involve the self-guided use of assessment, information, and
instructional resources in a library-like or Internet-based remote setting,
where resources have been designed for independent use by individuals with a
high readiness for educational and career decision making. The Self-Directed Search: Internet Version (Holland,
Reardon, Latshaw, Rarick, Schneider, Shortridge, & St. James, 2001) is an
example of a self-help educational and career assessment designed to link
students and majors or occupations suitable for further exploration. It includes
an interpretive report incorporating concepts from Holland’s theory. Other
self-help resources include the Dictionary of Holland Occupational Codes
(G. Gottfredson & Holland, 1996), the Educational Opportunities Finder
(Rosen et al., 1994), an educational and/or career library index arranged by
RIASEC codes, and computer-based educational and career guidance systems such
as Choices (Bridges.com, 2003) and DISCOVER (American College
Testing, 2003) that use Holland’s RIASEC classification to link persons and
career information. Holland’s typology is ubiquitous—it is even included in the
comprehensive, free, federal O*NET on-line system that links citizens with
employment and training options (http://www.onetcenter.org/).
By combining the concept of the self-help
service delivery and the findings of Smart et al. (2000), we can envision the
creation of self-help resources such as the following. A college could group
its majors in terms of RIASEC codes, produce a printed flier, and distribute
this widely to students on posters or websites. This classification of majors
according to Holland RIASEC codes would enable students to develop an
understanding of the academic culture of the college. Large universities may
have over 150 undergraduate majors and this can be overwhelming to students
needing to pick one field of study. Holland’s RIASEC schema helps to make this
process of exploring options less daunting.
In addition, a census of the majors
with the largest and smallest numbers of students and faculty at the college
would provide information about the relative social power of various
disciplines on the campus. In effect, such a census would provide a measured
sketch of the campus culture. For example, Reardon, Lenz, and Strausberger
(1996) used the Educational Opportunities Finder (Rosen et al., 1994) to
classify all of the majors at a large university, and then identified the
numbers of students majoring in each RIASEC category (R = 5%, I = 19%, A = 13%,
S = 34%, E = 19%, C = 10%). They used these data to assess the types of
students seeking services in the career center and to design appropriate
interventions. In addition, descriptive material associated with majors could
include the kinds of information summarized by Smart et al. (2000) about course
structures, learning style expectations, faculty interests and activities, and
program objectives. Other student information materials could list volunteer
experiences related to the discipline (if any), introductory classes, sample
employment opportunities, and profiles of graduates. U-Maps (Jacoby, Rue, &
Allen, 1984), posters incorporating Holland’s RIASEC typology and developed at
the University of Maryland, are an earlier example of just such an
intervention.
Brief staff-assisted services, a level
of services found in some career centers, involves practitioner-guided use of
assessment, information, and instructional resources in a library, classroom,
or group setting for clients with moderate readiness for career decision
making. Many interest inventories, e.g., Strong
Interest Inventory, and other tests provide results and interpretive reports
based on Holland’s theory. Workshops could be conducted using the RIASEC Game
(Reardon & Lenz, 1998). This activity provides students with an opportunity
to read brief descriptions of the RIASEC types, rank their top three
preferences, and then go to six stations in a room marked with the six letters
and engage in a social interaction with other students there, e.g., “why did
you select this letter?,” “what are your hobbies?.” Such theory-based
interventions provide an alternative to the unsystematic, eclectic counseling
and advising interventions used in some settings. Reardon and Lenz (1999) noted
that constructs important in Holland’s theory (1997), e.g., code, congruence,
differentiation, coherence, consistency, identity, profile elevation, are
readily translated into practice for use in designing interventions for
individual students with educational and career decision-making problems.
Many of the aforementioned activities
are most often practiced in a traditional career counseling setting. Yet, they
could easily be adapted to the current resources and structure of many academic
advising offices. The Internet or
paper-and-pencil format of the Self-Directed Search and increased advisor
knowledge of career-related resources would do little to change the structure
and typical operations of an academic advising office but could greatly add to
its effectiveness. Activities such as the RIASEC Game (Reardon & Lenz, 1998)
could be used as an aspect of fairs, workshops, panel discussions, or
expositions the academic advising office typically sponsors to further
implement the use of theory by advisors.
Individual case-managed services involve
practitioner-guided use of assessment, information, and instructional resources
in an individual office, classroom, or group setting for clients with low
readiness for career decision making. This type of intervention provides the
most substantial amount of assistance possible for persons with the greatest
need for help. Categories of individual case-managed services include
individual counseling or advising by appointment, career courses with small
group interaction, and longer term group counseling or advising (e.g., an
ongoing group for undecided majors). The academic advising office is often the
first stop of a student undecided about his or her major. Serving some of the
students in a group format that have more complex issues related to choosing a
major could save financial and human resources. An irony of Holland’s (1997)
theory is that many scholars and practitioners (e.g., Creamer, 2000) view it as
a simple matching model rather than a rich, complex person-environment
interaction theory, grounded in more than 500 studies that can inform
individual case-managed services. As demonstrated
by the implementation of Holland’s theory in the three-levels of service, it
can meet simple to complex needs.
Reardon
and Lenz (1998) and Holland, Gottfredson, and Nafziger (1975) indicated that
persons with poor diagnostic signs on the Self-Directed Search, e.g., lack of
congruence between expressed and assessed summary codes, low differentiation,
low consistency, low coherence among aspirations, low profile elevation, and a
high point code in the Realistic or Conventional area, were likely candidates
for more intensive interventions provided by more highly trained personnel.
High Artistic codes may also be problematic because of the student’s preference
for a non-rational approach to decision making (Holland et al., 1975). Persons
with such diagnostic indicators will likely need more time and professional,
individualized assistance in career problem solving and decision making.
Students
who are unsure about what discipline or field to pursue might benefit from a
thoughtful examination of the institutional context of their educational and
career decisions. Given the differences in academic departments and their
differential socialization effects (Smart et al., 2000), a student’s
understanding of the personally desired outcomes of a baccalaureate degree,
along with a review of his or her personality characteristics, could be
addressed in an individual counseling or advising situation. For example, a
student with a Social type personality might decide to develop skills and
interests emphasized in the Investigative environment. Such a choice would
involve various personal adjustments, costs, and compromises. Holland’s theory
could provide a conceptual basis for such a decision.
Smart et al.’s research reveals some
of the variations in academic departments and suggests implications for college
and university organizational systems. It is important for counselors and
advisors to inform students about the impact of majors and academic disciplines
on the development of student interests and skills. At present, advisors make
students aware of many aspects of a major, e.g., required courses,
prerequisites, entrance requirements, and the occupations most closely aligned
with the major. Providing additional information based on the research findings
by Smart et al. (2000) regarding the way academic environments socialize or
affect students pursuing that major will make students better “consumers” of
majors or “shoppers” of academic programs (Reardon, Sampson, & Lenz, 2000).
Caveats and Additional Ideas
This
section addresses some of the limitations of this analysis, as well as some of
the further implications for higher education beyond the areas of academic
advising and career counseling. In this paper we have emphasized the
differences in the ways faculty socialize students into disciplines, but there
are also universal qualities among faculty that should not be overlooked. For
example, faculty across all disciplines generally prize and value students’
intellectual development, academic and personal integrity, and high
achievement.
Although
the Enterprising environment typically emphasizes career preparation, this does
not mean that it is the only discipline that prepares college students for
employment. Nevertheless, some students (and/or their parents) believe that a
major in business is the only way to prepare for a job after graduation. This
kind of thinking needs to be addressed jointly by academic advising and career
counseling offices. Students need to understand that career preparation is
relevant to and appropriate for majors in all RIASEC disciplines, not just the
Enterprising area, and that advising and counseling services can help all
students prepare for employment after graduation.
In
this analysis we have only used one letter of a RIASEC code, but Holland’s
matching model is build around three-letter codes. Two- and three-letter codes
would provide more precision in matching persons and environments, but such
precision might be misplaced, especially given the current state of knowledge
regarding higher education environments. The measurement of environments is
problematic because the codes for majors, occupations, and jobs have not been
assessed by direct measurement. Direct measures of educational environments
using the Position Classification Inventory (Gottfredson & Holland, 1991)
would be preferable to the classifications based on indirect measures currently
available, e.g., Educational Opportunities Finder (Rosen et al., 1994).
Counselors
and advisors operating from Holland’s theoretical system would need to be fully
informed about the theory, the research that supports it, the instruments that
are based upon it, and the counseling and advising techniques that could be
derived from it. Such theory-driven practice might represent a new paradigm,
especially in academic advising. Holland’s (1997) theory, like other
typological theories, has the most power when the extremes of wealth, social
class, genetic traits, and health are not in effect. In other words, Holland’s
theory works best for people in general rather than at the extremes of any
personal trait or environmental characteristic. The professional judgment of
counselors and advisors needs to take these matters into account in work with
students.
Beyond the implications for advising
and counseling services, Smart et al. (2000) noted that students typically take
a variety of liberal studies or general education courses in their first two
years. Some of these courses are new and unfamiliar to students’ interests and
abilities. Given student attrition in the freshman year and the likelihood of
them flourishing in congruent environments, it is possible that the typical
pattern should be reversed and beginning students should take most courses in environments
that provide opportunities, activities, tasks, and roles that correspond to
their competencies, interests, and self-perceptions. The Self-Directed Search
and the Educational Opportunities Finder could be used to facilitate
this academic advising process. In subsequent years, students would take
courses that are increasingly dissimilar to their dominant personality type.
For example, Social students could take Social and Enterprising courses in
their freshman year, Artistic, Enterprising, and Investigative courses in the
sophomore year, Realistic and Conventional courses in the junior year, and back
to a Social capstone course in the senior year.
Smart et al. (2000) suggested an alternative college organizational
structure in relation to Holland codes for specific academic departments. For
example, instead of a traditional college or departmental organization grouping
all professional or liberal arts faculty together, departments could be
organized by RIASEC type. Or, alternatively, faculty within the traditionally
organized unit could be informally connected with other faculty in fields with
the same Holland code. Given that different colleges typically have varied
numbers of Holland code majors represented, this arrangement would help faculty
connect with others in similar areas of work who are not in their specific
college. Use of two-letter Holland codes would provide for more precision in
the identification of congruent work environments.
Finally,
research examining the degree of congruence between the Holland code for the
students’ major field of study and their personality should be undertaken to
examine the implications for poor academic performance or persistence in the
major. Do students in incongruent majors have lower GPAs and dropout at a
higher rate than students who are congruent with respect to personality and
major codes?
Summary
This article examined Holland’s
RIASEC person-environment interaction theory as a practical basis for academic
advising and career counseling services in colleges and universities. After a
brief review of Holland’s theory, including its early application in higher
education research, the book by Smart et al. (2000) was reviewed. This
examination focused on information that could be used to further support and
update resources based on Holland’s theory as it is used with university
students. Smart and his colleagues studied college faculty and students to
determine if constructs related to the socialization of students and their
adjustment in college were supported by data. The major assumptions of
Holland’s theory were supported and new information related to the development
of students’ interests and abilities and academic departmental socialization in
relation to Holland’s RIASEC types was provided. The article concluded with a
description of possible academic advising and career counseling interventions
along with other applications that are based on Holland’s theory. A
theory-based model for academic advising and counseling was presented.
References
American College Testing, Inc.
(ACT, 2003). DISCOVER (Windows) [Computer software]. Iowa City, IA: Author.
Astin,
A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.
Astin, A. W., & Holland, J. L. (1961). The
Environmental Assessment Technique: A way to measure college environments. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 52, 308-316.
Borgen, F.
(1991). Megatrends and milestones in vocational behavior: A 20-year counseling psychology retrospective.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 263-290.
Brown, D. (2002). Introduction to theories of
career development and choice. In
D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and
development (4th ed., pp. 3-23). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bridges.com Co. (2003). Choices
[Computer software]. Oroville, WA: Author.
Creamer, D. G. (2000). Use of theory in academic advising. In V. N. Gordon and W. R. Habley (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 18-34). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Day, S. X., & Rounds, J. B. (1998). Universality of vocational interest structure across racial and ethnic minorities. American Psychologist, 53, 728-730.
Ender, S.
C., Winston, Jr., R. B., & Miller, T. K. (1984). In R. B. Winston, Jr., T.
K. Miller, S. C. Ender, T. J. Grites, & Associates, Developmental
academic advising: Addressing students’ educational, career, and personal needs
(p. 3-34). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gottfredson, G. D. (1999). John L. Holland’s contributions to vocational psychology: A review and evaluation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 15-40.Gottfredson, G. D., & Holland, J. L. (1996) The dictionary of Holland occupational codes. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Gottfredson, G. D., & Holland, J. L. (1991) The Position Classification Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Gottfredson, L. S. (2003). The challenge and promise of cognitive career assessment. Journal of Career Assessment, 11, 115-135.Gottfredson, L. S., & Richards, J. M. Jr. (1999). The meaning and measurement of environments in Holland’s theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 57-73.Higher Education Research Institute. (1986). Cooperative Institutional Research Program codebook for 1980 freshman survey and 1990 follow-up survey. Los Angeles, CA: Author.Holland, J. L. (1973). Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Holland,
J., Gottfredson, G., & Nafziger, D. (1975). Testing the validity of some
theoretical signs of vocational decision-making ability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 411-422.
Holland,
J. L., Reardon, R. C., Latshaw, R. J., Rarick, S. R., Schneider, S.,
Shortridge, M. A., & St. James, S. A. (2001). Self-Directed Search Form
R Internet Version 2.0 [On-line]. Available:
http://www.self-directed-search.com.
Jacoby,
B., Rue, P., & Allen, K. (1984). UMaps: A person-environment approach to
helping students make critical choices. Personnel & Guidance Journal, 62, 426-428.
Muchinsky, P. M. (1999). Application of Holland’s theory in industrial and organizational settings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 127-35.
Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., & Sampson, J. P.,
Jr. (2003). The assessment of readiness for student learning in college. In G.
L. Kramer & associates. Student academic services: An integrated
approach (pp. 103-125). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Reardon,
R., & Lenz, J. (1999). Holland’s theory and career assessment. Journal
of Vocational Behavior (Special Issue), 55, 102-113.
Reardon,
R., & Lenz, J. (1998). The Self-Directed Search and related Holland
career materials: A practitioner’s guide. Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources, Inc.
Reardon,
R. C., Lenz, J. G., & Strausberger, S. (1996). Integrating theory,
practice, and research with the Self-Directed Search (Form R). Measurement
& Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 28, 211-218.
Reardon, R. C., Sampson, J. P., Jr., & Lenz, J. G.
(2000). Career assessment in a time of changing roles, relationships, and
contexts. Journal of Career Assessment, 8, 351-359.
Reardon,
R. C., Vernick, S. H., & Reed, C. R. (in press). A Holland perspective on
the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 1990. Journal
of Career Assessment.
Richards, J. M., Jr. (1973). A study of the “environments” of Japanese universities. Research in Higher Education, 1, 87-99.Richards, J. M., Jr. (1974). “Environments” of British Commonwealth universities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 572-579.Richards, J. M., Jr. (1987a). Psychosocial environments of Black colleges: A theory based assessment. Population and Environment, 9, 41-53.Richards, J. M., Jr. (1987b). The social ecology of U.S. law schools. Research in Higher Education, 26, 389-400.Rosen, R., Holmberg, K., & Holland, J. (1994). Educational opportunities finder. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Sears, S. (1982). A definition of career guidance terms: A National Vocational Guidance Association perspective. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 31, 137-143.Smart, J. C., Feldman, K. A., & Ethington, C. A. (2000). Academic disciplines: Holland's theory and the study of college students and faculty. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Tracey, T. J. G., & Darcy, M. (2002). An idiothetic examination of vocational interests and their relation to career decidedness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 420-427.Table
1
Summary
of Holland Types
|
Type |
Examples of Occupations/Fields
|
Typical Traits |
|
Realistic |
computer
engineering, forestry, surveyor, poultry science, and farmer |
mechanical
and athletic abilities, likes to work outdoors and with tools and machines,
and might be described as conforming, frank, hardheaded, honest, humble,
materialistic, natural, normal, persistent, practical, shy, and thrifty |
|
Investigative |
biology,
chemist, physicist, geologist, anthropologist, laboratory assistant, and
medical technician |
math
and science abilities, and likes to work alone and to solve problems; might
be described as analytical, complex, critical, curious, independent,
intellectual, introverted, pessimistic, precise, and rational |
|
Artistic |
composer,
musician, stage director, dancer, interior decorator, actor, and writer |
artistic
skills, enjoys creating original work, and has a good imagination; may be
described as complicated, disorderly, emotional, idealistic, imaginative,
impulsive, independent, introspective, nonconforming, and original |
|
Social |
teacher,
speech therapist, religious worker, counselor, clinical psychologist, and
nurse |
likes
to help, teach, and counsel people, and may be described as cooperative,
friendly, generous, helpful, idealistic, kind, responsible, sympathetic,
tactful, understanding, and warm |
|
Enterprising |
buyer,
sports promoter, television producer, business executive, salesperson, travel
agent, supervisor, and manager |
leadership
and public speaking abilities, is interested in money and politics, and likes
to influence people; described as acquisitive, agreeable, ambitious,
attention getting, domineering, energetic, extroverted, impulsive,
optimistic, self-confident, and sociable |
|
Conventional |
bookkeeper,
financial analyst, banker, tax expert, and medical laboratory assistant |
clerical
and math abilities, likes to work indoors and to organize things; described
as conforming, careful, efficient, obedient, orderly, persistent, practical,
thrifty, and unimaginative |
Table
2
Academic
Disciplines by Holland Types as Classified by Smart et al. (2000)
|
Type |
Academic Disciplines |
|
Investigative |
Allied
health/medical technologies, biology and life sciences, economics, geography,
math/statistics, physical sciences, finance, aeronautical engineering, civil
engineering, chemical engineering, astronomy, earth science, pharmacy,
premedicine, predentistry, preveteranian, anthropology, ethnic studies,
geography, and sociology |
|
Artistic |
Architecture,
fine arts (art, drama, music), foreign languages, English, music, speech,
theater, and environmental design |
|
Social |
Ethnic
studies, home economics, humanities (history, philosophy, religion,
rhetoric), library science, physical and health education, psychology, social
sciences (anthropology, political science, social work), elementary
education, special education, nursing, and law enforcement |
|
Enterprising |
Business,
communications, computer/information science, law, public affairs,
journalism, marketing, industrial engineering, and business education |
Smart, J. C., Feldman, K. A., & Ethington, C. A. (2000). Academic disciplines: Holland's theory and the study of college students and faculty. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
[1] The authors thank James Sampson, Jill Lumsden, Jeff Garis, Jill Parker, Linda Mahler, Janet Lenz, and John Smart for comments on early drafts of this manuscript. Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Dr. Robert Reardon, Career Center Dunlap Success Center, 100 S. Woodward Avenue, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4162; phone: 850-644-9777; email: rreardon@admin.fsu.edu.