Abstract

This paper presents Project CREW—an innovative collaborative career counseling program linking educational attainment and skill enhancement to community-based workforce development. Project CREW’s unique feature is its partnership model. Partnering organizations include an educational-workforce development consortium; a community and technical college system; a private, non-profit career services firm; and the local Workforce Investment Board. This partnership enables Project CREW to provide fee-free career services to community residents and post-secondary students. Project CREW’s model and program theory are presented and reconciled within the career development literature.

Introduction

This article presents Project CREW, a collaborative career counseling program for students and residents in the Louisville metropolitan community (LMC). Project CREW is a new program aimed directly at meeting the career development needs of individuals and strengthening the local workforce. There is a direct link between the career development needs of individuals and the economic well-being of a community. Herr (2000) outlined a number of critical economic issues that point to the need for new workforce development solutions and advocated for intensified collaboration among organizations on behalf of career development. Herr (2000) suggested that a partnership model combining the expertise, energies and insights of different organizations is a unique way to address the career development needs of today’s workers.

A review of workforce development initiatives across the nation provides examples of various types of partnerships among different organizations in the private, public and non-profit sector. Herr (2000) suggested the scope and frequency of such collaborations are likely to intensify in the future as the economy continues to shift and becomes more global. In a dynamic society, organizations are challenged to shift paradigms to create “career-resilient” workers—those who are equipped with skills and knowledge to manage their careers and adapt to change (Waterman, Waterman & Collard, 1994; Collard, Epperheimer & Saign, 1996). Project CREW is a program that is aligned with Herr’s advocacy; it is a pragmatic and novel partnership formed to enhance the workforce development needs in the LMC through career development. What follows is a description of project CREW and its partnering organizations.

Project CREW: Connecting Resources, Education and Workforce

Project CREW was initiated in 2003. Its mission is to work collaboratively with educational institutions, businesses, and civic organizations to assist clients in their career exploration, preparation, and placement. The main goal of the program is to provide a seamless transition from educational attainment to career placement by fostering academic achievement and successful career planning. The objectives of the program are:

  • To provide career counseling to assist clients in understanding how their interests, values, skills and personality connect with academic programs of study and career opportunities.
  • To provide resources to students to explore career interests and gain practical work experience through internships, volunteerism, job shadowing, informational interviews, co- curricular activities, and continuing education opportunities.
  • To encourage and empower clients to conduct successful job searches by assisting them with writing résumés and cover letters, interviewing skills, networking, and connecting clients with potential employers and available positions.
  • To provide information, guidance, and support regarding career development and employment issues to constituencies interested in connecting with the program.
  • To assist clients by placing them in their chosen career paths or advanced academic programs.

The partnering organizations of Project CREW are: Metropolitan College, Jefferson Community and Technical Colleges, Career Resources, Inc, and KentuckianaWorks (Louisville’s Workforce Investment Board).

Metropolitan College is not actually a college; it is a nationally recognized educational-workforce consortium formed from a partnership among United Parcel Service (UPS), the University of Louisville, Jefferson Community and Technical Colleges, state and local government. Students enrolled through Metropolitan College at any of the partnering institutions receive the full cost of their tuition along with employment opportunities from UPS. In exchange, students work four hours per night in UPS’s air hub. Since its inception five years ago, this innovative partnership has helped hundreds of students receive a free education and on-the-job training while simultaneously reducing employee turnover at UPS (Riggert, Ash, Boyle, Kinney, Howarth & Rude-Parkins, 2004). Project CREW is coordinated by Metropolitan College and was initially established to help Metropolitan College students identify potential career paths based on their UPS employment experiences.

Jefferson Community and Technical Colleges (JCTC) together form the largest district in the Kentucky Community and Technical Colleges System, with campuses in downtown Louisville, southwest Jefferson County, Carrollton and Shelbyville. JCTC serves 13,500 students annually and is the fourth largest undergraduate institution in Kentucky. Presently, JCTC offers degrees, certificates, and training to meet LMC workforce needs. Project CREW operates satellite counseling centers on three JCTC campuses.

Career Resources, Inc. (CRI) is a private, non-profit organization that provides career services and operates a network of one-stop career centers throughout the metropolitan area on behalf of the KentuckianaWorks. As the name implies, the one-stop career services delivery system makes a variety of federally-funded employment programs that offer self service (e.g. accessing information, filing unemployment claims, and completing employment applications), or counselor-assisted (e.g. intake and assessment, job placement and career counseling) available to clients at one location (Richer, Kubo & Frank, 2003). Under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998, the federal government dispenses funding through local workforce development areas throughout the United States and this funding is used for training and development purposes. Local workforce investment boards then are required to fund a user-friendly one-stop career system that serves community based job seekers and the local business community (Richer et al., 2003). With it’s unique “business first” focus, CRI develops innovative workforce solutions for local businesses seeking prospective employees with specific knowledge and skills and has won recognition from the Department of Labor and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for exemplary performance.

KentuckianaWorks is a business-led, policy-setting board that oversees workforce development initiatives in the metropolitan area. KentuckianaWorks is charged with creating a responsive workforce development system that benefits both employers and job seekers by promoting quality jobs, high skills, high wages, and life-long learning. The support of KentuckianaWorks is an important component of the Project CREW partnership, providing key linkages between the workforce, educational attainment, and subsequent career placement which are the objective of CREW.

Each partner brings a unique set of skills and experiences to the program’s mission. Metropolitan College applies its lessons learned from the corporate-educational consortium to address issues associated with working students. In addition, Metropolitan College provides primary administrative oversight of the program and is the main source of program funding. JCTC provides expertise in linking students’ career goals and aspirations with academic choices and technical skills that will prepare them for work. The faculty and administrators of JCTC actively promote the program’s services to students at the community and technical colleges. Faculty members encourage, and some even require, students to visit and research the program as part of their normal course requirements. The leadership of JCTC reacted so positively to the CREW concept that the program’s counselors were invited to make presentations to the students in general education courses. Seeing the program’s value, JCTC leaders eventually incorporated the program as a mandatory first semester experience for entering freshmen. The course called GE101 is part of JCTC’s general education program and is designed to introduce first-year students to the post secondary experience and prepares them to choose an appropriate major.

CRI brings its experience as administrator of the One-Stop Career Centers to provide labor and employment information to potential employers and employees. The program adopted the technical infrastructure of the One-Stop centers, and CRI underwrites the salaries and benefits of several of the program’s counselors. Finally, KentuckianaWorks provides the partnership with access to resources in support of workforce investment initiatives. Furthermore, the participation of CRI and KentuckianaWorks allows Project CREW to provide unlimited, on-demand career services to students as well as the general public free of charge. This feature makes the program unique in the realm of career counseling. An analysis of similar programs revealed that most career programs, particularly those offered by community agencies or postsecondary institutions, tend to charge a fee for service, require appointments, provide a limited number of sessions per client and limited walk-in service, or serve specific client populations (e.g. low-income workers, students).

Project CREW’s Program Theory

As previously noted, a collaborative combination of expertise, resources and insights is important to career development in today’s changing economy. While dynamic socio-economic issues affecting the workforce may require new practices, it could be argued that the theoretical tenets of career development are important regardless of context or climate. A review of the literature identified the fundamental propositions of career development theory—that programs should foster positive career-related activities (career exploration and personal assessment, information gathering, decision-making, and career planning); include a wide range of interventions (individual counseling, small groups and workshops, and computer-assisted guidance); and positively influence individual and societal work-related problems (enhancing educational attainment and academic achievement, reducing work-skills gaps, facilitating job placement, and reducing unemployment and other work transition problems.) These elements are the basis for most traditional career development program models (Brown & Brooks, 1996; Herr & Cramer, 1996).

In describing the “ideal” model for a career development program, Herr (1997) cited the following: “comprehensive career counseling, synthesized from the best models and methods of career counseling, also incorporates the best from theories of counseling and psychotherapy and goes considerably beyond them” (Crites, 1981, p. 14). The National Center for Research in Vocational Education (NCRVE, 1995) conducted a study to identify the characteristics of exemplary career guidance programs in secondary and postsecondary institutions. The NCRVE characterized programs as exemplary if the following three program components were in place: (a) comprehensive career guidance and counseling promoting students’ self-knowledge and self-awareness, educational and occupational exploration, and decision-making and career planning; (b) strong collaboration, articulation, and communication efforts among parents, businesses, community organizations, teachers, and other school personnel; and (c) institutional support, leadership, and program evaluation (NCRVE, 1995). The study further suggested that programs incorporating these three components produce positive student outcomes that ultimately impact entire communities.

Fitzpatrick, Sanders and Worthen (2004) noted that any program should be evaluated based on specific process and outcome measures and that a plausible program model should be developed around normative (practical) and causative (theoretical) information to characterize an overall program theory. Fitzpatrick et al. cited Chen’s (1990) definition of program theory as “a specification of what must be done to achieve the desired goals, what other impacts may also be anticipated, and how these goals and impacts would be generated” (2004, p. 205). Fitzpatrick et al. suggested that a program theory is needed to help an organization understand its inputs, actions and outcomes, and to guide the evaluation process. Guided with a vision of becoming an exemplary career development program as espoused by the NCRVE, Project CREW marshaled the missions and resources of its partners to address the needs of the local community. The challenge for Project CREW is to effectively validate its program theory. What follows is a brief review of the major career development literature in an attempt to reconcile Project CREW’s program theory with the literature and to provide a theoretical framework to guide the future evaluation of Project CREW.

Review of the Literature

The literature on career development theory is rooted in the work of Frank Parsons, whose theory of career counseling was based on the Socratic dictum “know thyself” (Brown & Brooks, 1996). Parsons’ model was derived from personality theory and emphasized three steps: (a) understanding of self (aptitudes, abilities, interests, resources and ambitions); (b) knowledge of the requirements for success in work, including opportunities, advantages, disadvantages and prospects in different lines of work; and (c) true reasoning on the relations of these two groups of facts (Parsons, 1909). When Parsons developed his theory, the nation was experiencing rapid industrial change and population growth. Parsons determined that the nation needed a new framework for matching vocational guidance with the needs of immigrant workers and youth (Brown & Brooks, 1996). Parsons’ model provides the framework for career development theory and practice, and continues to be a major influence today.

Within this framework, career counseling is intended to help people assess their career needs and to provide guidance toward achieving career goals. The literature describes career development as a process by which individuals choose the best career path through appropriate exploration and planning (Brown & Brooks, 1996). While the ultimate outcome of career counseling is individuals being placed in their chosen fields, the process should not be viewed as solely being focused on individuals making a choice of a job (Herr, 1997). Rather, theorists describe career development as a process that endures throughout the life span and includes activities that aid in the holistic development of individuals. The National Career Development Association defines career development as “the total constellation of psychological, sociological, educational, physical, economic, and chance factors that combine to influence the nature and significance of work in the total lifespan of any given individual” (NCDA, 2003). The factors that combine to form the career development process are categorized into three areas: career exploration, career planning and career placement.

Career Exploration, Planning and Placement: The Pillars of Career Development

The first stage of career development involves a period of focused exploration, including a series of personal analysis tasks to help individuals identify choice factors such as values and interests, and serves to increase career information-seeking (Spokane, 1991). The original model of vocational development set forth by Parsons (1909) emphasized the importance of self-assessment to understand personality traits that inform vocational choices. Trait and factor theories assume that an individual’s unique traits can be identified and measured, and that it is possible to match individual traits to occupations (Brandt, 1977; Brown & Brooks, 1996; Herr & Cramer, 1996). Holland’s (1997) Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments is most notable among trait-factor theories. Holland postulated there is a person-environment fit, in that people influence their environments, and environments influence people. Holland (1959, 1997) developed a six-category typology in which personality types and environments are described as realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional. Holland assumed that people look for environments that fit within their personal typology, and that personality and environment interact to produce behavior. According to Holland, congruency between personality and environment results in greater career satisfaction. Career development that applies focused career exploration incorporating information that is congruent with a person’s identified personality traits leads to more relevant career choices (Holland, 1997).

In addition to person-environment fit, other theories involving life-span development focused on the incorporation of self-understanding and choice (Brown & Brooks, 1996; Herr & Cramer, 1996). The most influential life-span theory is Super's (1957) Theory of Vocational Choice, which emphasizes that people seek work roles in which they can express themselves and develop their self-concepts. According to Super, vocational self-concept is developed as people pass through life stages and develop knowledge of the world of work. Herr and Cramer (1996) said that a major concern of career development is the clarity and accuracy of the self-concept as the evaluative base by which individuals judge career options. Self-concept manifests itself as career maturity, which is the readiness to make appropriate career decisions (Super, 1983). Super and Thompson (1979) identified six factors of career maturity: (a) awareness of the need to plan ahead, (b) decision making skills, (c) knowledge and use of information resources, (d) general career information, (e) general world of work information, and (f) detailed information about occupations of preference. Super (1983) operationalized career maturity as incorporating autonomy, time perspective (reflection on experience, anticipation of the future), and self-esteem. Luzzo (1999) found that career maturity is significantly influenced by self-esteem issues related to perceived barriers of gender, age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. While research has shown that career maturity is influenced by various personal characteristics developed over the life-span (Gottfredson, 1996), information obtained by assessing personal traits and exploring the world of work also enhances career maturity (Super, 1983).

Roe (1956) theorized that personality factors developed over the course of a person’s life also significantly influence career choice. Roe’s theory categorized eight groups of occupations (service, business, organization, technology, outdoor, science, cultural, and arts and entertainment). According to Roe (1956), people explore and choose work within one of these eight occupational groups based on biological, psychological and sociological factors developed over the life span. Ginzberg (1972) also suggested that life development plays a critical role in career choice. Ginzberg’s theory included career exploration as a process in early life stages in which people first imagine their work roles then recognize their interests, abilities and values. According to Ginzberg, exploration leads to more realistic identification of occupational choices.

Social-cognitive theories have more recently emerged in career development (Brown & Brooks, 1996; Herr & Cramer, 1996). These theories are focused on how people process, integrate, and react to information. This line of research focused on how people learn skills and make career decisions (Mitchell & Krumboltz, 1996; Peterson, Sampson, Reardon, & Lenz, 1996; Herr & Cramer, 1996). Social-cognitive career theories are derived from the work of Bandura (1986) and incorporate the influence of self-efficacy beliefs, environmental factors, and outcome expectations on behaviors and goal achievement.

Central to the career development process is the use of tests and inventories to promote career exploration and facilitate career planning (Spokane, 1991). Researchers have developed a number of psychometrically sound career assessment tools (Kapes, Mastie & Whitfield, 1994). The most common assessments are the Myers-Brigg Type Indicator, the Strong Interest Inventory, and Super and Thompson’s Career Development Inventory. More recently, there has been a movement toward instruments that can be self-administered (Kapes et al., 1994). For example, the DISCOVER system, developed by the makers of the American College Testing Entrance Exam, is a computer-aided personal inventory and career guidance system that helps clients understand how their interests, values, skills and personality relate to academic programs and careers (Kapes et al., 1994). Luzzo and Pierce (1996) found that students who used DISCOVER showed significant gains in career maturity. The System for Interactive Guidance and Information PLUS (SIGI-PLUS) is another commonly used computer-based career guidance system (Kapes et al., 1994). Kivlighan and Johnston (1994) found evidence in support of previous studies that advocated the use of the SIGI-PLUS system. Specifically, the system promoted significant gains in vocational identity.

After a period of focused exploration, an individual may then proceed into the development of a career plan, which is a sequence of steps and activities required to achieve desired career goals (Brandt, 1977; Spokane, 1991). Career planning is an element of Super's (1983) model of career maturity and involves processing exploratory information, making decisions toward a career path, and taking action toward achieving career goals (Spokane, 1991; Brown & Brooks, 1996; Herr and Cramer, 1996). Traditionally, the role of career counseling has been to provide appropriate levels of intervention to help people make concentrated efforts toward career planning and decision-making (Brandt, 1977; Super, 1983; Seligman, 1994). Holland (1973) and Brandt (1977) outlined models for the delivery and levels of intervention of career counseling services. The models include one-on-one intervention with a career counselor, small groups and workshops, and computer-based self-instruction.

Recent studies produced findings about the various levels of interventions and effects on different client populations. Oliver and Spokane (1988) examined the effects of career interventions on career decision making, effective role functioning, and counseling evaluation relative to different levels of treatment. Individual counseling was found to have the largest effect size, followed by workshops/structured groups. Whiston, Sexton, and Lasoff (1998) replicated Oliver and Spokane's study and found that individual counseling still had the most effect on the outcome variables, but computer-based intervention had the next highest effect size. Kivlighan and Johnston (1994) found that clients with high work-goal instability were dissatisfied with computer-based intervention and preferred individual counseling. Luzzo (1999) suggested that while non-traditional college students tend to possess higher levels of personal agency toward making career decisions, they require more targeted levels of intervention that include high levels of interpersonal contact (e.g. individual counseling and workshops/structured groups).

As previously noted, researchers have linked career development with Bandura’s social-cognitive theory of self-efficacy. According to Bandura (1986) self-belief intervenes between knowledge and action. Bandura (1986) theorized that knowledge, skill, and prior attainments do not necessarily predict subsequent attainments because the beliefs that individuals hold about their abilities and about the outcome of their efforts powerfully influence the ways in which they will behave. Through the career development process, individuals are guided toward developing broad pictures of themselves and in interpreting the results of focused exploration activities. The process helps inform and alter their self-beliefs and environments, which in turn inform and alter their subsequent attainments. By “knowing thyself,” a person is essentially better equipped to successfully move through the career development process, make positive career transitions and actualize into her/his ideal career path and subsequent placement in a job.

Project CREW’s Logic Model

The career development process may be likened to Maslow’s (1954) Hierarchy of Needs, in which he described how people satisfy various personal needs in the context of life and work. Maslow (1954) theorized that there is a general pattern of needs recognition and satisfaction that people follow and that a person could not recognize or pursue the next higher need in the hierarchy until her/his currently recognized need was substantially or completely satisfied. According to Maslow (1954), an individual seeks to ultimately actualize into a desired state of self-fulfillment in what she or he does in life and work. In the same manner, the career development process may also be viewed as hierarchical. The previous literature review on career development showed that theorists placed importance on a person investing a significant amount of time at the lower end of the career development process (i.e. exploration). This helps the individual gain the necessary information to pursue the next level of development and subsequent placement in a career. As the lower-order needs are met and new information is processed, individuals are driven toward more targeted means of achieving their career goals. Career counseling, then, may be viewed as an intervening variable in the recognition and satisfaction of the work-goal needs of individuals. Figure 1 depicts a hierarchy of the career development process and introduces the Project CREW program logic model.

Project CREW clients receive personalized counseling through individual and group interventions. Clients have access to a team of counselors, computer applications and information systems designed to help them identify and cultivate their academic and career goals. Clients are taught to map out each stage of the career development process—career exploration, career planning and career placement. Project CREW is premised on the belief that career counseling clients will achieve successful outcomes (job/career attainment) if career counseling and support services are delivered through a partnership and in a staged manner where clients are able to satisfy their need to explore, plan, and experience before career placement is achieved. Project CREW helps career counseling clients satisfy the lower order need for career exploration, career planning and intervening experiences. The program’s model involves an initial period of exploration and career assessment. The literature explained that personal assessment is an integral part of the career development process and it helps clients make informed decisions. Clients begin this stage by initially interviewing with a counselor. During this stage, counselors assist clients with exploring self-identities and potential careers while emphasizing appropriate academic preparation. In these sessions, clients are encouraged to engage in activities that will position them for future career growth. After the intake session, the DISCOVER system is administered to help clients learn about interests, values and goals as well as academic majors and occupations that fit their interests. DISCOVER, along with other Internet-based information portals, may also be used to research information about potential career areas, job trends and projections, and salaries.

The second stage of the program’s career development model involves helping clients develop short-term and long-term plans. Counselors help clients integrate newly acquired career exploration information with practical applications of course work and work experiences. The program conducts a series of workshops and career classes continuously throughout the year. In addition, clients may come to the center at any time with or without an appointment for one-on-one counseling, academic planning, preparing for job interviews, and assistance with writing cover letters and résumés.

Project CREW offers the Internship, Co-operative and Experiential Education Program through which eligible students obtain paid and unpaid jobs. Internships introduce students to the “real world” and help students learn to think and solve problems and develop their communication skills, which are all critical components of an education (Raymond & McNabb, 1993). The value of experiential learning is that it connects students with the realities of theories learned in the classroom. Students are able to experience situations instead of simply discussing how they would hypothetically approach situations (Kolb, 1984). Raymond and McNabb (1993) studied the perceptions of business students and employers to determine the efficacy of various teaching methods on work skills and abilities, and both groups ranked internships as most effective.

The program guides and assists clients in selecting academic programs or career paths and employment opportunities; however, the program does not offer placement services, nor does it track the placement activity of clients. Academic planning and transfer services are offered to assist clients who wish to pursue higher levels of education. Counselors conduct job fairs, coordinate job interviews and provide access to job postings. To identify specific job opportunities, clients may use the program’s computers to access regional and national job posting websites. In keeping with the program’s mission, clients are encouraged to seek opportunities in the local community. The program’s main resource for local job postings is GreaterLouisvilleWorks.com, a regional job portal that provides lists of open positions and allows job seekers to post their résumés.

More than 80% of the clients who have already been served by the program are students from JCTC or the University of Louisville. The majority of clients are between the ages of 18 and 38, approximately 58% are women and, nearly half are minority. Moreover, a majority of clients have little to no previous college experience and are engaged for the first time in pursuing an academic degree or certification in a technical area. Other than the students enrolled through Metropolitan College, only a small percentage of clients currently hold jobs. Others have been dislocated from their jobs, or have been unemployed for some time and need assistance with identifying career possibilities. Clients who meet special eligibility requirements may receive additional WIA assistance for job training, intensive career counseling, and skills development. These clients—who typically include members of underrepresented groups, the habitually unemployed, and dislocated workers—are tracked and referred on to receive intensive counseling or training services designed for individuals who cannot obtain employment through core one-stop activities. Intensive services include counselor-assisted activities such as skills assessment, development of individual career plans, and case management. The target population for training services includes individuals pursuing careers in high demand fields, such as healthcare and information technology. CREW counselors have been successful with placing many WIA-eligible clients in training programs, educational programs, and employment. In addition, counselors work very closely with vocational rehabilitation agencies to ensure that clients with disabilities or special needs receive appropriate training and counseling.

A Framework for Evaluating Project CREW

Now that Project CREW has completed a second year of operation, an evaluation framework must be developed to assess the extent to which program components are in place, to identify program metrics and measure specific outcomes, and to guide Project CREW for performance improvement. As noted earlier, Fitzpatrick et al. (1994) recommended evaluating programs based on specific process and outcome measures by conducting a Program Rheory Evaluation (PTE). The purpose of PTE is to identify what it is about a program that causes the desired outcomes (Rogers, Petrosino, Huebner & Hacsi, 2000). Fitzpatrick et al. (2004) suggested that PTE is the most effective way to help an organization understand its inputs, actions and outcomes, and to guide the overall evaluation process.

Following the guidelines established by the NCRVE (1995), Project CREW should incorporate a formative assessment plan to validate knowledge claims, assess pragmatic assumptions about the efficacy of the program, and integrate the attitudes of stakeholders (e.g. clients, staff, partners and faculty). Concurrent data collection procedures (i.e. mixed methods) would broaden the level of interpretation of the program evaluation; therefore, a summative assessment must be conducted to directly address program outcomes. According to the NCRVE (1995), a comprehensive career development program should produce both intermediate and ultimate outcomes. Intermediate outcomes (also called outputs) refer to the knowledge, skills, or attitudes acquired by participants because of career counseling (Peterson & Burck, 1982). Other intermediate outcomes of career counseling include impacts on behavior such as academic performance or satisfaction with academic/career choices (Tinto, 1993). Ultimate outcomes of the career development process include the effects of client gains that have long-term impact on an entire community (Peterson & Burck, 1982). As noted earlier, there is a direct link between the career development needs of individuals and the economic wellbeing of a community. Gray and Herr (1998) suggested that workforce development initiatives incorporating the fundamental propositions of career development theory help increase individual opportunity and raises the level of educational and socioeconomic attainment of an entire community.

The literature recommends numerous developmental, socio-cognitive, and behavioral outcome domains to consider for evaluation; however, the major short-term outcome domains to consider are self-concept and identity, career decidedness/choice congruence, career maturity, satisfaction, and performance (Oliver & Spokane, 1988). Drawing on the most significant findings from the research, a useful assessment model for Project CREW would include summative analyses of the following: client profile data (e.g. age, gender, ethnicity, academic status, employment status, etc.); intermediate developmental and socio-cognitive outcomes (e.g. self-knowledge and vocational identity, career decidedness and career maturity/adaptability); intermediate behavioral outcomes (e.g. academic performance, job attainment and satisfaction with academic/career choices); and evaluation of counseling services (e.g. ratings of satisfaction and counselor efficacy). Super (1983) also recommended conducting follow-up evaluation of clients after program completion to determine if career counseling had long-lasting effects. Follow-up evaluation might include administering psychological surveys and assessing academic or career activities of former counselees. Finally, program evaluators must effectively link Project CREW’s performance measures to economic trends and the realization of workforce development goals of the community by examining the relationships among intermediate outcomes and ultimate outcomes having community impact (e.g. educational attainment, unemployment rate, average earnings). Figure 2 outlines an evaluation schematic linking the variables, and in what direction of influence, in the summative assessment of the PTE. All data must be analyzed using appropriate non-numerical (qualitative) and statistical (quantitative) procedures.

Concluding Comments

According to Grubb and Lazerson (2005), vocationalism in American education proliferated during the twentieth century. Beginning with Parsons in the early 1900s, many scholars, social service providers, and local and state governments have continually explored ways to link youth and the unemployed with appropriate education, training, and career services and to address the changing times. Over the past forty years in particular, a number of programs in vocational education, welfare-to-work, and adult education emerged across the nation on behalf of workforce development. These programs were geared toward increasing the occupational readiness and preparedness of

American youth and workers-in-transition through proper schooling, training, and counseling. WIA is the most recent version of previous workforce development programs and provides a single funding stream to link academic and occupation learning for low-income, underrepresented youth and adult workers (Wonacott, 2000). Other funding opportunities through federal legislative mandates and grants for expanded research, program development, and training grants also proliferated. Postsecondary institutions increasingly vocationalized standard curricula to include an emphasis on workplace preparedness for specific types of jobs, and many private employers and community-based organizations separately developed and maintained their own training programs (Grubb & Lazerson, 2005). As a result, Grubb (1999) suggested that the American workforce development system became wrought with duplication, fragmentation, and confusion. Grubb (1999) further suggested that the effectiveness of many of these programs is questionable because of the lack of sufficient evidence of results.

Grubb (1999) and Grubb and Lazerson (2005) make compelling arguments for programs like Project CREW. That Project CREW was formed around an innovative partnership model suggests that each partner saw a need to eliminate duplication by combining resources to deliver a broader, more comprehensive set of services to students and residents of the LMC. By delivering comprehensive career-related and workforce development services under one roof, Project CREW is positioned to meet a variety of needs for a variety of people, particularly students, minorities, and members of underrepresented groups. Most importantly, because the mission of Project CREW emphasizes educational attainment, counselors encourage uneducated or undereducated clients to pursue the next level of their education to enhance their prospects for attaining desired employment opportunities. In fact, CREW counselors often personally help individual clients with test preparation and college applications.

Project CREW is a novel career development program that links educational attainment and skills development to community-based workforce development. The literature provided a conceptual framework for Project CREW’s program theory and logic model and showed that Project CREW aligns directly with career development theory. However, Project CREW goes beyond traditional approaches to career counseling in that it is formed around a comprehensive-collaborative framework. Traditional program models provided a foundation for evaluating the effects of career counseling. Newer models like Project CREW must go beyond traditional ones by providing individuals with knowledge and skills to not only choose a career, but to become career-resilient and to skillfully plan for career transitions. Furthermore, that Project CREW has already helped hundreds of clients, particularly Metropolitan College students, demonstrates the program’s potential for broader community impact. The true test of Project CREW’s efficacy is the ability to produce practical results that benefit all stakeholders, and such results can only be demonstrated through formative and summative evaluations of the program.

PTE is an ideal method to demonstrate the impact Project CREW has on individual attainments as well as community workforce development. Most accountability systems focus on performance and results rather than inputs and processes. Wonacott (2000) stated that WIA, consistent with the U.S. government’s performance-based approach, emphasizes outcomes over inputs, results over process, and continuous improvement over management control. However, the magic of Project CREW is in the mix of partners, each one bringing different levels of expertise to serve a common goal. In the case of Project CREW, one could argue that program outcomes and results are driven by the program’s unique combination of inputs and resources. Consequently research relevant questions could be answered by evaluative data generated from the program. For example, an important area for future research is to examine the differences related to self efficacy or placement activity between WIA-eligible clients served by traditional One-Stop centers and those served by Project CREW. Additionally, a comparison of retention and graduation rates of postsecondary students who received CREW services and those who have not received services could inform policies and procedures related to institutional effectiveness of JCTC and Metropolitan College Institutions. Results showing positive significant differences in academic and career-related outcomes for CREW populations compared with non-CREW groups may only be attributable to the services, guidance, and resources available through Project CREW.

While previous studies showed mixed results related to academic and career-related outcomes based on gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES), studying the influence of these and other demographic variables on academic and career-related outcomes of different CREW populations would inform administrative decisions related to specific program elements and intervention strategies. As previously noted, PTE allows researchers to examine what it is about the program that produces desired outcomes and results and how the program achieved them. Evaluative information reconciling Project CREW’s theory, practice, and results would be extremely informative for other service providers and communities that wish to replicate the CREW model. For now, preliminary results show that a Project CREW model including partners from private industry, education, and local government along with a program theory strongly rooted in the literature are keys to success that may unlock the door to economic opportunity for the entire community.

References

Bandura, A. (1986). The social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Brandt, J. D. (1977). Model for the delivery of career development programs by the college counseling center. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24(6), 494-501.

Collard, B. A., Epperheimer, J. W., & Saign, D. (1996). Career resilience in a changing workplace.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ED 396 191)

Brown, D., & Brooks, L. (Eds.). (1996). Career choice and development (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Ginzberg, E. (1972). Restatement of the theory of occupational choice. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 20(3), 7-176.

Gottfredson, L. S. (1996). Gottfredson's theory of circumscription and compromise. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed.). (pp. 179-232). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gray, K. C., and Herr, E. L. (1998) Workforce education: The basics. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Grubb, W. N., & Lazerson, M. (2005). Vocationalism in higher education: The triumph of the education gospel. Journal of Higher Education, 76(1), 1-25.

Grubb, W. N., & Associates. (1999). Toward order from chaos: State efforts to reform workforce development systems. Berkley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

Herr, E. L., & Cramer, S. H. (1996). Career guidance and counseling through the life span: Systematic approaches (5th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.

Herr, E. L. (1997). Career counseling: A process in process. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 25(1).

Herr, E. L. (2000). Collaboration, partnership, policy, and practice in career development. Journal of Employment Counseling, 37(2).

Holland, J. L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 6, 35-45.

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 (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Kapes, J.T., Mastie, N.M., & Whitfield, E.A. (Eds.). (1994). A counselor’s guide to career assessment instruments (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: The National Career Development Association.

Kivlighan Jr., D. M., & Johnston, J. A. (1994). Who benefits from computerized career counseling? Journal of Counseling & Development, 72(3), 289-292.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Luzzo, D. A. (1999). Identifying the career decision-making needs of nontraditional college students. Journal of Counseling & Development, 77(2), 135-140.

Luzzo, D. A., Pierce, G. (1996). Effects of DISCOVER on the career maturity of middle school students. Career Development Quarterly 45, 170-172.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.

Mitchell, L. K., & Krumboltz, J. D. (1996). Krumboltz's learning theory of career choice and counseling. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed.). (pp. 233-280). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

National Career Development Association. (2003). Career development: A policy statement of the National Career Development Association board of directors. http://www.ncda.org/pdf/Policy.pdf

National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (1995). 1995 Exemplary career guidance programs: Opening career paths for all students. MDS-1016. http://www.nccte.org/publications/ncrve/mds-10xx/mds-1016.asp

Oliver, L. W., & Spokane, A. R. (1988). Career-intervention outcome: What contributes to client gain? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 447-462.

Parsons, F. (1909). Choosing a vocation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Peterson, G.W., & Burck, H. D. (1982). A competency approach to accountability in human service programs. Personnel & Guidance Journal, 60, 491-495.

Peterson, G. W., Sampson, J. P., & Reardon, R. C. (1991). Career development and services: A cognitive approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Peterson, G. W., Sampson, J. P., Reardon, R. C., & Lenz, J. G. (1996). Cognitive information processing approach to career problem solving and decision making. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed.). (pp. 423-476). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Raymond, M. A., & McNabb, D. E. (1993). Preparing graduates for the workforce: the role of business education. Journal of Education for Business, 68(4), 202-206.

Richer, E., Kubo, H., & Frank, A. (2003). All in one stop? The accessibility of work support programs at One-Stop Centers (Report No. CE-085-614). Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED481829)

Riggert, S. C., Ash, D., Boyle, M. A., Kinney, J., Howarth, D. A., Rude-Parkins, C. (2004). Metropolitan College: Building community value through education-business partnerships. Innovative Higher Education, 29(1), 7-19.

Roe, A. (1956). The psychology of occupations. New York: Wiley.

Seligman, L. (1994). Developmental career counseling and assessment (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Rogers, P. J., Hacsi, T. A., Petrosino, A., & Huebner, T. A. (2000). Program theory evaluation: Practice, promise, and problems. New Directions for Evaluation, 87, 5-13.

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

Super, D. E. (1957). The psychology of careers. New York: Harper.

Super, D. E. (1983). Assessment in career guidance: Toward truly developmental career counseling. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 555-563.

Super, D. E., & Thompson, A. S. (1979). A six-scale, two-factor measure of adolescent career or vocational maturity. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 28, 6-15.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd. ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Waterman Jr., R. H., Waterman, J. A., & Collard, B. A. (1994). Toward a career-resilient workforce. Harvard Business Review, 87-95.

Whiston, S. C., Sexton, T. L., & Lasoff, D. L. (1998). Career-intervention outcome: A replication and extension of Oliver and Spokane (1988). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 150-165.

Wonacott, M. E. (2000). The Workforce Investment Act and CTE [career and technical education]. In Brief: Fast Facts for Policy and Practice No. 6: National Dissemination Center for Career and Technical Education, Columbus, OH.

Ray K. Haynes is an Assistant Professor, Nichola Ditto Johnson is a doctoral student, and Mike A. Boyle is an Associate Professor in the Department of Leadership, Foundations and Human Resource Education at the University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.