Children's Career Development:

Metaphorical Images of Theory,

Research, and Practice
Mark Watson
Mary McMahon
This summative article discusses 5 invited contributions on children's career development. The authors of these articles were asked to consider the status quo of
children's career development, issues facing thisfield,and future directions. Several
emergent themes focused on theory, research, and practice and their interactive
potential in children's career development. Suggestions for future direction in the
study of children's career development include the need for greater contextualization and interdisciplinary collaboration, the revision and innovation of theory, and
the need for organizing frameworks for theory, research, and practice.
He decided to open the door again and let in some light.
C. S. Lewis (1975, p. 31)

In the introductory article to this special section on children's career development, McMahon and Watson (2008) review the persistent call in recent
decades for a more comprehensive, integrative, and holistic approach to career
theory, research, and practice in the study of children's career development.
They describe the need for a greater focus on process issues and the need to
embed children's career development within life span career development.
In addition, the present inadequate recursiveness between theory, research,
and practice and the consequences this has had for practical intervention
in the earlier phases of career development have been identified. It is clear
that the career literature on children is both disparate and generally lacking
in depth (Watson & McMahon, 2004).
The aim of this special section was to invite prominent scholars in the field
of children's career development to consider these challenges. Specifically,
invited contributors were asked to refiect on three themes: the status quo
of children's career development literature, the issues facing the field, and
the fiiture directions that could be considered. Two of the articles provide a
more conceptual understanding of the needs in the field (Hrtung, Porfeli,
& Vondracek, 2008; Schultheiss, 2008), two articles provide examples of
programmatic research that is responsive to these needs (Helwig, 2008;
Tracey & Sodano, 2008), and one article describes proposed programmatic research (Porfeli, Hrtung, & Vondracek, 2008).
The current summative article explores the five invited contributions in
relation to the suggested themes. We believe that the status quo of children's
Mark Watson, Department ofPsychology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University,
Port Elizabeth, South Africa; Mary McMahon, School ofEducation, The University
of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Correspondence concerning this
article should be addressed to Mark Watson, Department of Psychology, Nelson
Mandela Metropolitan University, PO Box 77 000, Port Elizabeth, 6031, South
Africa (e-mail: mark.watson@nmmu.ac.za).
2008 by the National Career Development Association. All rights reserved.

The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

75

career literature is predominantly a description of the present issues that

the field faces. Thus, the invited responses are grouped within two themed
sections: the status quo of children's career development literature and the
future direction that theory, research, and practice should take.

Looking Through the Keyhole: The Status Quo

of Children's Career Development
In their article, Porfeli et al. (2008) reopen the door on the neglected
status of children's career development and how critical such neglect is
considering that the foundations for future career development are laid
at this developmental stage. The neglect has existed since the inception
of career psychology, and Porfeli et al. point out that the goals described
by Parsons (1909) and Mnsterberg (1913) remain largely unaddressed.
It seems that although the movement toward a career developmental
approach turned the focus from a static to a process conception of career development, the focus within the career development literature
has remained predominantly static with a skew toward adolescence
and adulthood. Further compounding this situation, in our opinion, is
the skewed U.S. and middle-class population base upon which much
of the literature on children's career development is presently based.
This point has also been made by Schultheiss (2008). In many senses,
the literature on children's career development remains in its infancy,
particularly in terms of its lack of attention to process dimensions,
compared with the maturation of the career literature that has focused
on later developmental stages.
This review of the status quo of children's career development is
described in terms of theory, research, and practice. These are n o t
independent aspects ofthe career literature, and the authors recognize
the interactive, recursive relationship that should occur between these
three dimensions and refer to this where appropriate.
A persistent theme that emerges from the articles is the lack of an
organizing theoretical framework that informs both theory and practice
(Hrtung et al., 2008; Porfeli et al., 2008; Schultheiss, 2008). Thus,
although Schultheiss identifies the lif^ span developmental focus of the
career literature on children as a strength along with its interdisciplinary nature, she also identifies its weakness in that the career literature is
not theory driven. Schultheiss comments that there is a lack of detailed
research on children's career development that is founded on theory.
Tracey and Sodano's (2008) article demonstrates how career research of
children can provide support for theoretical conceptualizations, such as
Holland's (1997) view of vocational interests. Porfeli et al. express other
concerns about the extant theoretical frameworks that inform research
and practice, pointing to the lack of consistent operational definitions
of career constructs and the consequent threat this creates in terms of
the validity of research findings and career interventions.
There are divergent suggestions about the application of career theory
to research and practice in children's career development. Schultheiss
(2008) alerts the field to the possibility that basing research and career
programs on established career theories could produce blind spots in its
understanding of children's career development. She points to the fact
that much of career theory as it presently stands is based on retrospec76

The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

tive introspection, a peeping backward through the keyhole rather than

an entering through the door. As such, the study of children's career
development based on extant theory may be guided by a conceptual
framework that is less appropriate for children and more appropriate for
older developmental ages. This framework suggests that much of the
field's understanding of children's career development may be founded
on adopted and somedmes adapted career constructs from other career developmental phases. In addition, this raises a related issue as to
whether current theoretical accounts of children's career development
are related to a childhood that is past or significandy different from the
world in which children presently develop and, if so, how appropriate
these theories are as a basis for iture research of and program development for children's career development.
Although they identify similar issues to those of Schultheiss (2008),
Hrtung et al. (2008) propose a different solution, that is, a research
approach grounded in one theory. The authors suggest a theoretical
model founded on career construction theory, and they propose that the
construct of career adaptability may be a useful framework for systematically informing both research and practice within the field of children's
career development. This framework provides four developmental lines of
career adaptability, some of which refiect on earlier theoretical formulations, such as the concept of career control and Roe's ( 1956) earlier work
on parent-child relationships. The authors' concept of career curiosity
indicates how failure to stimulate this activity in childhood can lead to
foreclosure in adolescent career decision making. This concept suggests
the expansion of the boundaries of career exploration rather than a narrowing down of options (such as occupational gender stereotyping) at
a developmental stage when such expansion is developmentally more
appropriate career behavior. A further example of embedding research
findings in conceptual frameworks is found in the long-term research
program of Tracey and his colleagues (Tracey, & Darcy, 2002; Tracey,
Lent, Brown, Soresi, & Nota, 2006; Tracey & Robbins, 2005; Tracey,
Robbins, & Hofsess, 2005; Tracey & Rounds, 1993; Tracey & Sodano,
2008; Tracey & Ward, 1998). Tracey and Sodano's review of this program of research provides an excellent example of how such research
can be conceptualized within a framework that defines the process of
interest stability and change over time.
Emerging from the discussion of career theory and children's career
development is a related conceptual issue about childhood itself (i.e., what
phase of childhood to focus on and how childhood should be currently
understood within the postmodern context in which children develop).
Porfeli et al. (2008) offer a rationale for commencing longitudinal research in middle to late childhood, referring to middle childhood as the
dawn of vocational development. This raises the question of how early
is too early to begin researching children's career development. Clearly,
middle childhood may be a more pragmatic developmental phase to
research given the requirements of most research, such as the literacy
levels of research participants.
Another conceptual issue in the field's understanding of children's
career development is the changing nature of childhood itself. Although
there is explicit recognition of the changing nature of work, there is
litde explicit discussion of childhood itself in the career literature. HarThe Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

77

tung et al. (2008) discuss the possibility that there is less of a cultural
moratorium involving freedom from work and responsibility for the
present generation of children. This issue raises questions again about
established career theory. For instance, is Super's (1957, 1974, 1990)
conception of childhood in earlier decades generationally removed from
childhood experiences of the present decade.'
The introductory article to this special section refers to the concerns of
two recent major reviews of research on children's career development
(Hrtung, Porfeli, & Vondracek, 2005; Watson & McMahon, 2005). The
articles in this special section identify similar concerns to these reviews.
There is a sense of dj vu when reading the invited contributors' comments on children's career development research because they introduce
a research agenda with a long-standing history. This raises the question
of why historically identified issues related to children's career research
remain essentially the same issues today. For instance, there is consistent
criticism of the lack of a theoretical and organizing framework within
which to conduct research on children's career development (Hrtung
et al., 2008; Schultheiss, 2008).
This lack of an organizing framework has contributed to another major
issue in career research on childrenthat ofthe diverse and fragmented
research base that presently informs the field's understanding of children's
career development. Related to this issue is the call for research to be
conducted contextually, particularly in terms of life span developmental
theory (Schultheiss, 2008). Although there is evidence of interdisciplinary contextualization in research on children's career development, it
seems difficult to translate this into an interdisciplinary body of" research
when the research appears in a wide range of academic journals, thus
increasing the fragmented dissemination of research findings.
There is a persistent theme identified in most articles concerning the
fact that theory does not inform research and practice and that research
does not inform theory and practice (e.g., Porfeli et al., 2008). Hrtung
et al.'s (2008) article on a rationale for research on children's career development provides a potential framework for interrelating research with
theory and practice. They introduce several dimensions around which
extant and fiature research could be analyzed, including the constructs of
career exploration, career awareness, vocational expectations and aspirations, vocational interests, and career maturity/career adaptability.
There are several issues raised about career practice as it relates to
children's career development. Common to most of these issues is the
isolation of practice from theory and research as well as the effectiveness
of career intervention as it currently stands. Porfeli et al. (2008) point
to the gap between career interventions at an elementary school level
and the research that should inform such interventions. They argue that
such a gap reinforces the identified gap between school and work and
between school counseling practice and developmental science.
There are other gaps evident in career practice and children's career
development. Schultheiss (2008) notes the gap between research and the
policy initiatives that drive career intervention. This gap results in career
programs for children that are not well informed about how children
arc socialized and how they develop an orientation to the world of work
within family, school, and community contexts. This state of affairs probably contributes to another point that Schultheiss makes: Career guidance
78

The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

programs often fail to meet the national guidelines set for them. Porfeli et
al, (2008) identify another gap between career development intervention
in elementary schools and the commitment of school resources to such
efforts. These authors argue that this gap creates significant barriers to
the career development of all children but particularly for those children
who face an accelerated transition into the workforce.
Research has frequently made recommendations related to career intervention. For example, Tracey and Sodano (2008) are able to identify
suitable times for career intervention as well as the content to be addressed in this intervention. However, there remains a lack of empirical
research to validate career interventions at the elementary school level,
a situation identified by Porfeli et al. (2008) as another issue that has
an impact on career practice and children's career development. One
reason for this is the lack of assessment tools with which to conduct
evaluations as well as the questionable validity of extant instruments that
attempt to provide such validation. Where research has focused on career
intervention at the elementary school level, results have not always been
encouraging. Helwig's (2008) article describes longitudinal research that
indicates that, retrospectively, interventions at this developmental level
were found to be of less help than originally perceived.
There is a need to become more proactive in interrelating research and
practice in children's career development, Porfeli et al, (2008) believe
that such proactivity could prevent career exploration foreclosure in
children in general and in minority group children in particular. The
authors further state that this proactivity could also stimulate academic
performance in elementary school children through promoting more
explicit connections between school and thinking and between work and
doing, thus closing several gaps identified earlier in this article.

Unlocking the Door: The Future Direction

of Children's Career Development Theory,
Research., and Practice
The contributions to this special section provide conceptual ways forward
for the study of children's career development. In addition, practical
examples (e.g., Helwig, 2008; Tracey & Sodano, 2008) of how status
quo issues may be addressed are provided as well as illustrations of the
type of research that is possible and is needed.
Several contributors call for the study of children's career development to
be contextuaUzed within an interdisciplinaryfi-amework.Schultheiss (2008 )
calls for interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, and Hrtung
et al, (2008) similarly call for the influence of other disciplines, such as developmental psychology, developmental sociology, life span development,
and developmental systems theory, among others, Fvirthermore, practical
examples of how to contextualize children's career development are provided in this special section. For example, both Tracey and Sodano's (2008)
and Helwig's (2008) research links childhood to adolescence, albeit in the
case of Tracey and Sodano, this is only in relation to interest development,
Tracey and Sodano also contextualize their findings on girls' interest scores
to recognized transition points in the educational system. This type of contextualization has important practical implications because it suggests that
career intervention is needed at key points within the educational system.
The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

79

There is some diversity in suggestions for the fiiture direction of theory and
children's career development. Several authors call for the revision of extant
theory. Porfeli et al. (2008) suggest that a critical step in advancing e career
theory of children is to identify extant core theoretical constructs with the
development of sound instruments to measure these constructs. Tracey and
Sodano (2008) provide a practical example of research that is responsive to
the need to find out whether extant theory applies to children. They found
support for a trait conceptualization ofinterests such as is proposed in Holland's
(1997) theory. Schultheiss (2008) also considers extant theory and suggests
that revision of such theory could be a way forward. However, Schultheiss
suggests that a more radical step may be required in that there is a need to
start at the beginning again in formulating a new theoreticalfi-ameworkwithin
which to understand children's career development. Schultheiss proposes that
there is an opportunity at this point to provide discovery-oriented theory
building that is based on qualitative research. This suggests that although the
regeneration of extant theory is one possibility, going back to the drawing
board, as Schultheiss phrases it, could lead to the generation of new theory
and the reinvigoradon of the field.
Central to these suggestions for theory building is the question of
whether children's career development should be researched from an
existing theoretical base or whether a new theory needs to be developed
founded on a research base. It seems to us that this is a theoretical dilemma
that the field needs to engage in more vigorously. It raises questions as to
whether existing career constructs may constrain the field's thinking of
children's career development, on the one hand, but it also suggests that
a theory specific to children may make developmental contextualization
with later career stages more difficult to achieve.
Underpinning the debate about the future direction of this theory is the
possibility that an intensified focus on children's career developmental theory
(and, indeed, on the career research of children) may create a new, disparate
body of research and theory that wl mirror the present fi-agmented status
of the career literature. It alerts the field to the possibility that the greater
unity sought in the career literature on children may diminish the potential
richness of a more disparate body of theory and research.
As with the discussion on theory, there is a call for future research to
embed contextual and interdisciplinary fi'ameworks within children's career
development. Schultheiss (2008) calls for multidisciplinary partners that
would provide a context inclusive of other disciplines as well as provide
organizing dimensions and constructs for future research and practice.
She suggests collaborative intervention-based research that is inclusive
of developmental psychology, developmental-contextual models, and
family influences, among other disciplines.
The discussion of a contextual fi-amework for the study of children's career
development goes beyond a discussion of the potential theory base. One
focus of discussion is on what research of children's career development
should be related to. There is a call from several authors to relate research
more closely to theory and for research to providefi-ameworkswithin which
their findings can be understood. Tracey and Sodano's (2008) research
provides an example of how research can be grounded in theory as they
explore interest stability within four overlapping conceptions of" interest
development. This research also offers a useful fi-amework for reviewing
research on vocational interests.
80

The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

Several other contexts are suggested to which future research could be

more closely related. Schultheiss (2008) indicates that the future research
of children's career development needs to be related to the educational
curriculum and that there is a need for research at both a systems level
and an individual level of intervention. There is also a consistent call for
future research to be more inclusive of other population groups, such
as children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, different ethnic
groups, and groups with special needs. Tracey and Sodano's (2008)
research provides a good illustration of diversifying the research focus
to different ethnic groups.
Related to the discussion of a broader research base are the calls for a refocus in research methodology. The dominance of cross-sectional research
on children has been recorded in other reviews of children's career research
(Hrtung et al., 2005; Watson & McMahon, 2005). Most contributions to
this special section reemphasize the critical need for longitudinal research
if a meaningful understanding of children's career development is to be
established. Indeed, there are two excellent examples of research of a more
developmental nature (Helwig, 2008; Tracey & Sodano, 2008).
There also is a related discussion about assessment. Porfeli et al. (2008)
believe that the identification of a core set of instruments would be a
critical step in implementing longitudinal research. They propose the
development of a Web-based instrument that is theoretically eclectic.
Schultheiss (2008) suggests that qualitative research, particularly in
grounded theory, offers other assessment possibilities. Helwig's (2008)
use of a qualitative interview provides an example of the possibilities
offered by qualitative research of a longitudinal nature.
There is general agreement about the critical need to promote career
interventions at the elementary school level. Porfeli et al. (2008) state
that such interventions should engage children in the process of career
exploration so that children may establish a healthy orientation to the
world of work. The authors argue that early intervention would help
reinforce the connections between school and work and, in so doing,
have a favorable impact on later student development. The recognition
of the importance of early career intervention is also related by several
authors to research and theory. Tracey and Sodano's (2008) research
demonstrates the relationship between research and intervention in their
identification ofthe timing and nature ofthe intervention needed. Similarly, underlying the four theoretical developmental lines proposed by
Hrtung et al. (2008) is the importance that career program intervention
can play in enhancing and stimulating career adaptability. However, on
a cautionary note, Helwig (2008) suggests that career intervention may
not always be as beneficial as may be imagined or hoped.

Conchisinn
It is evident from this special section that concerns raised about the present and niture status ofthe literature on children's career development
persist. The view through the door remains limited. The invited articles
reinforce the fact that the field continues to describe children's career
development from a restricted and limiting base, whether this base be
theoretical, research, or practice. It is also clear that there are consistent
efforts to address and redress these concerns. These efforts remain largely
The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

81

uncoordinated at present, thus perpetuating the disparate nature of career

theory, research, and practice in this field that has been identified as an
issue. One way forward is to address the call made in several articles in
this special section for interdisciplinary and international collaboration
that may provide a more cohesive and substantial body of literature.
The present special section is an example of how prominent scholars
can collate their perceptions and research into a more cohesive body of
work. This would be even more beneficial if accounts were encouraged
that are relevant in other countries and cultures in order to achieve a
richer understanding of children's career development. The willingness
to examine issues in the field of children's career development that are
highlighted in this special section is a strength of the field.
The outcomes of bringing together a number of authors to reflect on the
status quo and iture directions in children's career development theory,
research, and practice have some parallels with those of the convergence
project of the early 1990s (Savickas & Lent, 1994). Specifically, although
no agreement has ultimately been reached on a way forward, the value
may lie in the process of opening the door on a discussion that may
"help nurture a sense of shared mission . . . that promotes convergence
as well as diversity" (Lent & Savickas, 1994, p. 270).
As evident in the contributions to this special section, there is no one
clear direction forward. Indeed, it may be oversimplistic to think that
there could be one direction in a field that is as diverse and complex
as children's career development and in which there is still so much to
learn. Thus, there may be multiple ways forward that, to some extent,
may seem paradoxical. For example, the disparate nature of the extant
research could be perceived as a weakness because it reflects a lack of
depth and could also be viewed as a strength illustrative of the breadth of
topics in which research has begun and could be fiirthered. Furthermore,
the lack of a theory base for research is seen as a weakness, yet it may
be construed positively because it leaves the door open to test the applicability of extant theory or to develop new theory related to children's
career development. In addition, although the field may be criticized
for what it has not done, what it has done reflects remarkable resilience
in an area that has traditionally been undervalued and underfunded.
Although it is likely that a disparate range of research will continue into
the iture, it is hoped that fiiture research may also incorporate greater
attention to the issues raised in this special section.
The contributions to this special section certainly open the door irther and throw light on the issues that need to be addressed and on the
way forward in the field's understanding of children's career development. The door needs to be more widely opened, however, if the field
is to proactively address the remediation of career behaviors of later
developmental stages that are too oen grounded in a narrower, more
stereotypical career awareness and exploration in childhood.

References
Hrtung, P. J., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2005). Child vocational development:
A review and reconsideration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 385-419.
Hrtung, P. J., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2008). Career adaptability in childhood. The Career Development Quarterly, 57, 63-74.
82

The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

Helwig, A. A. (2008). From childhood to adulthood: A 15-year longitudinal career

development study. The Career Development Quarterly, 57, 38-50.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and
work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Lent, R. W., & Savickas, M. L. ( 1994). Postcript: Is convergence a viable agenda for career
psychology.* In M. L. Savickas & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Convergence in career development
theories: Implicationsfor science and practice (pp. 259-271). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Lewis, C. S. (1975). The lion, the witch, and the wardrobe. London: Collins.
McMahon, M., & Watson, M. (2008). Children's career development: Status quo and
future directions. The Career Development Qtiarterly, 57, 4-6.
Mnsterberg, H. (1913). Psychology and industrial efficiency. Boston: Houghton MiffUn.
Parsons, F. (1909). Choosing a vocation. Boston: Houghton MifHin.
Porfeli, E. J., Hrtung, P. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2008). Children's vocational development: A research rationale.TOeCareer Development Quarterly, 57, 25-37.
Roe, A. (1956). The psychology of occupations. New York: Wiley.
Savickas, M. L., & Lent, R. W. (Eds.). (1994). Convergence in career development theories:
Implications for science and practice. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Schultheiss, D. E. P. (2008). Current status and future agenda for the theory, research,
and practice of childhood career development. The Career Development Quarterly,
57, 7-24.
Super, D. E. (1957). The psychology of careers. New York: Harper & Row.
Super, D. E. (Ed.). (1974). Measuring vocational maturity for counseling and evaluation.
Washington, DC: National Vocational Guidance Association.
Super, D. E. (1990). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. In D. Brown,
L. Brooks, & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development: Applying contemporary
theories to practice (2nd ed., pp. 197-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
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.
Tracey, T. J. G., Lent, R. W, Brown, S. D., Soresi, S., & Nota, L. (2006). Adherence to
RIASEC structure in relation to career exploration and parenting style: Longitudinal
and idiothetic condtrzons. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 248-261.
Tracey, T. J. G., & Robbins, S. B. (2005). Stability of interests across ethnicity and
gender: A longitudinal examination of Grades 8 through 12. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 67, 335-364.
Tracey, T. J. G., Robbins, S. B., & Hofsess, C. D. (2005). Stability and change in adolescence: A longitudinal analysis of interests from Grades 8 through 12. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 66, 125.

Tracey, T. J., & Rounds, J. (1993). Evaluating Holland's and Gad's vocational interest
models: A structural meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 229-246.
Tracey, T. J. G., & Sodano, S. M. (2008). Issues of stability and change in interest development. The Career Development Quarterly, 57, 51-62.
Tracey, T. J. G., & Ward, C. C. (1998). The structure of children's interests and competence perceptions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 290-303.
Watson, M., & McMahon, M. (2004). Children's career development: A metatheoretical
perspective. Australian Journal of Career Development, 13, 7-12.
Watson, M., & McMahon, M. (2005). Children's career development: A research review
from a learning perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 119-132.

The Career Development Quarterly

September 2008 Volume 57

83