Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The MAP (Model Advisement Procedure) is a comprehensive, systematic approach to developmental student advisement. The MAP was implemented to improve advisement consistency, improve student preparation for internships/senior projects, increase career exploration, reduce career uncertainty, and, ultimately, improve student satisfaction with the post-graduate preparation offered by the program. The MAP structures each advisement session with a set of advisement questions, handouts, activities to complete between advisement sessions, and a place to record information for future advisement sessions. The present report is intended to describe the development of the MAP and the resources it offers. Further, we report on preliminary post-implementation assessment of the new advisement procedures. Although the effects were largely non-significant, the results indicated that students’ career exploration was more likely to be the result of the encouragement of advisors after the implementation of the MAP. Moreover, narrative data indicate that students are pleased with the new advisement procedures and the information/tools provided to them.

Keywords

Advisement career development developmental advising psychology majors

Psychology is one of the most popular majors across colleges and universities in the USA, conferring over 117,298 baccalaureate degrees in 2013–2014 (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2015, Table 322.10). Yet, data suggest that only a minority of students (25%) will obtain a graduate degree in the field (American Psychological Association, 2014) or remain in fields related to psychology without graduate training (20%; Halonen, 2011; National Science Foundation, 2010). As a result, psychology faculty members are being asked to educate majors with very divergent post-graduate plans. In this challenging environment, career advisement is crucial (American Psychological Association, 2013; Halonen, 2013).

Farmingdale State College is a medium-sized campus of a large state university system. As a college of “applied science and technology,” a significant component of the mission of the institution is to ensure that graduates are prepared for rewarding careers without additional post-graduate education/training. As a result, the Applied Psychology Program offers a concentration in Industrial/Organizational Psychology. The program is designed to accomplish two parallel goals: (a) to prepare students, wishing to complete their education at the Bachelor’s level with the knowledge and experience to enter satisfying, entry-level careers in human resources (HR); and (b) to provide the theoretical knowledge, analytical skills, and exposure to effective writing necessary for work and graduate school success. Commensurate with the expectations of a Bachelor of Science Degree in Applied Psychology and the current requirements of entry-level jobs in the area of Industrial/Organizational Psychology, all program graduates must successfully complete either an internship or an applied research project in their senior year.

Although we have developed a relatively unique program concentration with a clear career path, our students are reflective of national data that indicate great diversity in psychology majors’ motivations, interests, and career aspirations (Borden & Rajecki, 2000; Halonen, 2011). In addition to those seeking careers in HR, students in our program wish to pursue Master’s and Doctoral degrees in almost every sub-discipline of the field (e.g., clinical, Industrial/Organizational, neuropsychology, guidance counseling, mental health counseling, and social work). Moreover, some students are clear that, while psychology will be their major field of study in college, they have no interest in a career in the discipline. These students have diverse goals including other graduate education (e.g., medicine, law, physical therapy), or Bachelor’s-level careers in such varied areas as criminal justice, business, and education. Still other students begin college with only vague notions of where their degree in psychology might lead. Typical academic advisement allows advisors to probe students’ career goals and recommend commensurate courses. However, given the diversity of interests and possible career options, the American Psychological Association (APA) and others suggest that, to be successful, psychology majors need more: they need deliberate, systematic, comprehensive career planning (American Psychological Association, 2013; Borden & Rajecki, 2000; Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, & Hill, 2007). The Model Advisement Procedure (MAP) was designed to be this kind of developmental career planning tool.

Students in the Applied Psychology Program are required to participate in academic advisement every semester. Results from our first Graduate Exit Survey revealed that 100% of students in our first graduating class were satisfied with the academic advisement they received, their mandatory internship/senior project experience, and their preparation for either graduate school or entry-level employment (depending on their goals). However, when graduates were questioned only two years later, perceptions had changed: the percentage of students who felt that the internship/senior project sequence was helpful in preparing them for employment success had decreased to 69.6% and only 65% believed that the Applied Psychology Program helped them achieve their career goals. This information was disturbing given that our alumni survey data indicated that students were enjoying objective success in terms of high employment and graduate school acceptance rates. The survey revealed that, of 57 graduates, 40% were enrolled in graduate school, 72% were employed full- or part-time, and 37% of those who were employed were in field relevant positions. It appeared that our students were similar to those surveyed by Borden and Rajecki (2000): although they were largely employed, they were either unsatisfied with their employment or failed to see the connection between their college education and their employment.

The desire to address these concerns coincided with the implementation of college-wide academic advising software that reduced the need for course-selection advisement. The department recognized, in this new software, an opportunity to rethink the purpose and content of student advisement. We redesigned our advisement procedures to follow a developmental model (Creamer & Creamer, 1994; Crookston, 2009) that emphasizes self-reflection and career counseling. We envisioned an advisement process that encouraged and enabled students to develop greater clarity about their post-graduate plans and be better prepared to execute them. Moreover, we envisioned an advisement plan capable of meeting the needs of all of our students, no matter their ultimate career outcome.

We developed a comprehensive MAP of students' four years in the Psychology Major. The MAP was designed to do the following: (a) orient students to the goals/philosophy of the program and the concentration in I/O; (b) outline courses to take and when to take them; (c) provide opportunities/assignments to explore psychology as a profession; (d) provide opportunities for self-reflection and values exploration in relation to career; (e) provide career investigation/development resources; (f) trouble-shoot career decision-making problems; (g) initiate internship planning; (h) guide the preparation required for graduate school; and, finally, (i) provide resources regarding subfields in psychology, non-psychology careers, and the skills valued by employers. The MAP structures each advisement session with a set of course/career/graduate school questions for students to answer, handouts, activities to complete between advisement sessions, and a place to record information for future advisement sessions (see MAP, Appendix).

Resources included in the MAP materials include the following: a program display and course planning guide; a document entitled “What Can You Do With A Major in Psychology?”; the Oregon Vocational Interest Scale (Pozzebon, Visser, Ashton, Lee, & Goldberg, 2010); a list of relevant career, job search, internship, and professional society/organization websites; an assignment to explore ONET (the US Department of Labor website); one of several publically available “Work Values” inventories, including one available online through the US Department of Labor “Careeronestop” website (Virginia Department of Education, nd); Skills Valued By Employers* (Appleby, 2000); a document listing all of the graduate psychology programs in greater New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut; Avoiding the Kiss of Death in Graduate School Applications (Appleby & Appleby, 2006); and a guide to requesting letters of recommendation. Every student is given each document as developmentally appropriate and as needed, given their post-graduate career plans. Students who continue to struggle with their career choice by the second semester of sophomore year are directed to take the Career Decision Making Difficulty Questionnaire (CDDQ; Gati, Krausz & Osipow, 1996; Gati, Osipow, Krausz, & Saka, 2000) and/or make an appointment at the college career center for additional counseling. Finally, the MAP makes early internship planning an integral and deliberate part of advisement.

Implementation of the MAP was both a major undertaking and a relief to faculty. They were given greater responsibility for appropriate advisement across students with many different goals. However, they were also given the collective resources and wisdom of the department to engage in comprehensive advisement driven by students’ needs. Ultimately, faculty members were better equipped to mentor all students, not only those following a familiar/traditional path to a psychology career.

Our goals for the implementation of the MAP were to improve advisement consistency, improve student preparation for internship/senior project, increase career exploration, reduce career uncertainty, and, ultimately, improve student satisfaction with the post-graduate preparation offered by the program (whether graduate education or employment).

In order to determine whether the MAP is effective in improving students’ preparation and planning for life after college, we implemented a set of assessment tools to be administered to all students before mandatory advisement each semester, as well as a year-end focus group.

Method

Participants

Population

All Applied Psychology majors at Farmingdale State College, enrolled in the fall 2014 (N = 123) and spring 2015 (N = 120) semesters, were asked to participate in an assessment of the MAP. Fourteen majors graduated or left the program after the fall 2014 semester and 11 transfer students entered in spring 2015; 109 students were enrolled both semesters. Enrollment and student demographic data is collected in the fall semester of each year. At baseline, in fall 2014, 93 (75.61%) Applied Psychology majors were women; 30 (24.39%) were men. Eighty-one majors reported their ethnicity as White (65.85%), 21 Hispanic/Latino (17.07%), 10 Black (8.13%), five Asian (4.07%), three Bi-Racial (2.44%), and three (2.44%) were non-residents of the USA.

Finally, the majority of Applied Psychology majors are commuter students who work at least part-time while attending school full-time. In fall 2014, 118 majors (95.93%) were enrolled full-time and with only five (4.07%) part-time.

Sample

While all majors were recruited for participation in the MAP assessment, students were given the option of consenting to have their results used for research purposes. In the fall 2014 semester, 84 students consented to participation in this research project and 57 in spring 2015. Ten students in the spring 2015 sample reported that this was their first time being advised using the MAP. As this was our post-intervention assessment, these students were removed from the analysis, resulting in a sample size of 47. Each sample included lower- and upper-classmen (see Table 1). The consent rate was significantly lower than expected. In exploring possible explanations, it was noted that students who opted out were not required to complete the final questionnaire. The opportunity to exit the assessment likely contributed to the low consent rate and will be addressed in future administrations.
Table 1.
Frequency Percentages of Participating Students by Class Standing

Baseline
Post-intervention

Class standing f % f %

Freshman 14 16.70 9 19.10

Sophomore 20 23.80 8 17.00

Junior 22 26.20 13 27.70

Senior 28 33.30 17 36.20

Total 84 100.00 47 100.00

In addition to the objective assessment of students’ knowledge, experience, behaviors, and perceptions, the department conducted a voluntary focus group in order to probe students’ perceptions and concerns about advisement. The focus group was conducted at the end of the school year (during the final exam period) after students had experienced two rounds of advisement. Unfortunately, the timing may have made it difficult for students to attend. The sample size for the focus group was five students.

Materials and Measures

To assess the MAP, Applied Psychology majors completed a number of inventories, including a career certainty measure, subjective and objective measures of career-relevant information, reporting of career exploration activities, and general perceptions about advisement in the Psychology Department. Sample items from each measure can be found in Table 2. These measures served a dual purpose: they were used to identify areas of difficulty, which could then guide the advisement appointment, and served as an assessment of student preparedness so that we can track changes over time.
Table 2.
Sample Items from Select Measures Used in the Assessment

Measure Sample items

Career Decision Making Difficulty Questionnaire I find it difficult to make a career decision because I do not know what steps I have to take. I find it difficult to make a career decision because people who are important to me do not agree with the career options I am considering. I find it difficult to make a career decision because I do not have enough information about the variety of occupations or training programs that exist.

Psychology Majors Career Information Quiz (T/F) To enter a master's degree program in business (MBA), you must have a bachelor's with a major in some business area. The doctor of psychology degree (PsyD) in clinical psychology offers the exact same education and opportunities as a PhD but costs much less to complete.

Satisfaction with Information How satisfied are you with the amount of information you have on jobs that are congruent with your interests and abilities? How satisfied are you with the amount of information you have about the specific career in which you are interested?

Perceptions of Advisement Questionnaire Psychology Department advisors help me understand why required courses are important for my professional development and future plans. Psychology Department advisors have assisted me in developing a long-term career plan. Psychology Department advisors assist in career guidance.

Note. Items for other measures can be found in subsequent tables.

Career certainty

Participants first completed a career certainty measure, reporting their level of certainty on a five-point scale ranging from 1=I don't even have a general direction to 5 = I am sure and confident of the occupation I want. Those students who reported a low level of certainty (1 or 2 on the five-point scale) were directed to an adapted version of the CDDQ (Gati et al., 2000) to identify the factors contributing to their indecision. The questionnaire included 16 items that load onto one of two dimensions: difficulties due to a lack of information or difficulties due to inter/intrapersonal conflict. Each item was rated on a nine-point scale rating from 1 = Does not describe me well to 9 = Describes me well.

Level of information

Four measures were used to assess students' current level of career-relevant information. Participants first completed a two-item measure to assess the amount of information they have about the demands, requirements, and preparation needed for careers that they are considering. These items were measured on a five-point scale from 1 = Little to 5 = A tremendous amount. The second measure assessing level of information was the Psychology Majors Career Information Survey adapted from Thomas and McDaniel (2004). The nine-item survey assessed students' perceptions of the amount of general information they have about graduate school and career options in the field. All items were answered on a five-point scale from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree. To obtain an objective assessment of knowledge, participants completed the Psychology Majors Career Information Quiz also adapted from Thomas and McDaniel (2004). The quiz included eight true/false questions about graduate school and career options in the field and was scored as the total number of questions correct. Finally, students reported their satisfaction with the amount of information that they have about career options that may be well suited to their interests and abilities using a five-point scale from 1 = Very dissatisfied to 5 = Very satisfied.

Career exploration

Students reported the extent to which they had engaged in different career exploration activities (e.g., attended a career fair) over the past three months using an eight-item adapted version of the Career Exploration Survey (Stumpf, Colarelli, & Hartman, 1983). All items were answered on a five-point scale from 1 = Not at all to 5 = A great deal. Students were also asked to indicate what had prompted them to engage in career exploration behaviors (e.g., prompted during an advisement appointment).

Perceptions of advisement

Lastly, students completed a 21-item measure reporting their perceptions of various aspects of the advisement process. This questionnaire was adapted from Aellig, Dickson, Dwyer, and Francis' (2008) instrument to assess academic advising. Ratings were made on a five-point scale from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree.

Focus group

Focus group questions covered changes in advisement, ways that advisors encouraged/enabled career exploration, internship preparation, and advisors’ behaviors (see Table 3).
Table 3.
Sample Focus Group Questions

Domain Sample items

Old versus new advisement What changes have you noticed in academic advising? How satisfied are you with the level/type of information you are receiving in advisement now compared to the old advisement?

Questions about advisement Has advisement encouraged you explore career options? What have you done to research careers in the last few months? Have your advisors helped you consider and plan for careers that are NOT in the field of psychology? Has advisement and/or the career exploration activities suggested by your advisor led you to be more certain about your career choice?

Questions about internship/graduate school/employment How has advisement helped you prepare for internship/senior project? What information was useful to you either in preparing for graduate school or searching for graduate school options? How has advisement helped you prepare for employment after graduation?

Questions about advisors How have your advisors been most helpful to you? What problems/challenges have you encountered in advisement? Have you had any negative experiences or frustrations in relation to advisement?

Design and Procedure

To assess the utility of the MAP, the department developed a longitudinal assessment procedure to be implemented each semester, to track improvements in student preparedness over time. All Applied Psychology majors were asked to complete the online assessment prior to their scheduled advisement appointment. Baseline data were collected prior to the introduction of the new advisement procedures in the fall 2014 semester. The first set of post-intervention data was collected in the spring 2015 semester, after one implementation of the MAP. The same measures were used for both administrations and data analysis examined changes across the two time periods. To ensure anonymity and encourage candid feedback, no identifiable information was collected. Thus, although some students participated in both administrations, a repeated measures analysis was not possible. Focus group narrative data were obtained after students had undergone two semesters of the new advisement procedures.

The MAP is a menu of interventions to be offered, appropriate to student needs, during student advisement each semester. While we predict major long-term changes as the effects accumulate over four years of intervention, we expect relatively small, incremental changes between individual semesters.

Results

Mean changes across time periods were examined using independent sample t-tests. Chi-square analyses were also used, where appropriate, to examine percentage differences. Overall, consistent with expectations, only minor differences were noted between administrations—yet given the nature of some changes, it does seem that they may be attributed to the MAP.

Career Certainty

On the one-item career certainty measure, students reported an average level of certainty at baseline (M = 3.45, SD = 1.29) and post-intervention (M = 3.60, SD = 1.23). No significant differences were noted between time periods, t(129) = –0.62, p = .537. An examination of percentages for each response on the career certainty measure (see Table 4) revealed that 93% of students had at least a “general direction” related to career. There was consistency in the percentage of students who reported “I do not even have a general direction,” as well as those who reported being “sure and confident” in their career decision, across time periods. An increase was shown in the percentage of students who were considering a specific career, but still exploring options from 26.20% at baseline to 38.30% post-intervention. Percentages were not significantly different across administrations, χ²(4, N = 131) = 2.29, p = 0.682. Although not significant, the positive change is consistent with our goals for the MAP, that is, increase career exploration behaviors to improve career decision-making.
Table 4.
Frequency Percentages of Student Responses on the Career Certainty Measure

Baseline
Post-intervention

Response choice f % f %

1. I do not even have a general direction 6 7.10 3 6.40

2. I have a general direction 18 21.40 8 17.00

3. I am deliberating on a small number of careers 15 17.90 6 12.80

4. I am considering a specific career but exploring options 22 26.20 18 38.30

5. I am sure and confident 23 27.40 12 25.50

Total 84 100.00 47 100.00

Students who reported career uncertainty (n = 24 baseline, n = 11 post-intervention) were directed to the CDDQ to identify the factors contributing to their indecision. On average, a moderate level of difficulty was reported at baseline (M = 4.29, SD = 1.36) and post-intervention (M = 4.76, SD = 1.30), with no significant difference between time periods, t(33) = –0.95, p = .351. At both time periods, most difficulties were due to a lack of information about careers rather than intra/interpersonal conflict (see Table 5).
Table 5.
Means, Standard Deviations, and t-Test Results for Career Decision Making Difficulty Questionnaire Dimensions

Baseline (n = 24)
Post-intervention (n = 11)

Dimension M SD M SD t p

Lack of information 4.55 1.76 5.08 1.33 –0.90 0.376

Intra/interpersonal conflict 3.77 1.28 4.05 1.51 –0.58 0.563

Overall 4.30 1.36 4.76 1.30 –0.95 0.351

Note. Response choices range from 1 = Does not describe me well to 9 = Describes me well.

Level of Information

Students first provided a subjective assessment of the level of information they have about the tasks, demands, requirements, and preparation needed for careers they are considering, using a two-item measure. A slight increase was shown in the amount of information they have about the tasks of the job from baseline (M = 3.06, SD = 0.95) to post-intervention (M = 3.34, SD = 1.05), although this difference was not significant, t(128) = –1.55, p = .123. A similar increase was noted in the amount of information they have about the demands, requirements, and preparation needed for the career from baseline (M = 3.05, SD = 1.00) to post-intervention (M = 3.28, SD = 1.13). This difference was also not significant, t(126) = –1.21, p = .229. An examination of the response percentages for these items (see Table 6) reveals an increase in the percentage of students reporting that they have at least “a great deal” of information about job tasks (32.50% at baseline compared to 48.90% post-intervention) and the demands, requirements, and preparation needed for the career (30.50% at baseline compared to 43.50% post-intervention). Percentages, however, were not significantly different across administrations for either item, χ²(4, N = 130) = 4.11, p = 0.391 and χ²(4, N = 128) = 3.10, p = 0.541, respectively. Given the intention of the MAP, however, to provide students with additional information about careers of interest, this result is promising.
Table 6.
Frequency Percentages of Student Responses on the Two-Item Level of Information Measure

Baseline
Post-intervention

Response choice f % f %

How much information do you have on what a person does [tasks] in the career area(s) you are considering?

1. Little 5 6.00 3 6.40

2. Some 16 19.30 6 12.80

3. A moderate amount 35 42.20 15 31.90

4. A great deal 23 27.70 18 38.30

5. A tremendous amount 4 4.80 5 10.60

Total 83 100.00 47 100.00

How much information do you have about the demands, requirements, and preparation needed for the career area(s) you are considering?

1. Little 6 7.30 3 6.50

2. Some 15 18.30 8 17.40

3. A moderate amount 36 43.90 15 32.60

4. A great deal 19 23.20 13 28.30

5. A tremendous amount 6 7.30 7 15.20

Total 82 100.00 46 100.00

On the Psychology Majors Career Information Survey, a slight increase was noted in students' average perceptions of the amount of general information they have about graduate school and career options from M = 3.53 (SD = 0.66) at baseline to M = 3.74 (SD = 0.71) post-intervention. While this increase was not significant, t(128) = –1.64, p = .104, it was in the expected direction, and similar increases were noted in the average ratings across all individual survey items (see Table 7). A significant increase was found for the item, “I can identify several different fields of study that would allow me to do counseling/therapy and I understand what each of these involves", from M = 3.23 (SD = 0.97) at baseline to M = 3.72 (SD = 0.88) post-intervention, t(128) = –2.90, p = .004.
Table 7.
Means, Standard Deviations, and t-Test Results for the Psychology Majors Career Information Survey

Baseline (n = 83)
Post-intervention (n = 47)

Item (abbrev.) M SD M SD t p

I understand the kind of work done by different psychologists 3.89 0.64 4.06 0.82 –1.33 0.187

I know what steps to take to become a psychologist 3.64 0.94 3.79 1.04 –0.83 0.408

I know how to prepare for and get admitted to grad school 3.13 1.15 3.36 1.21 –1.06 0.290

I can identify fields of study that allow me to do counseling 3.23 0.97 3.72 0.88 –2.90 0.004

I can identify helping professions outside psychology 3.17 1.02 3.49 0.95 –1.76 0.081

I can identify areas in business in which psychology is valuable 3.28 1.06 3.38 1.13 –0.53 0.595

I can find information online about careers of interest 4.17 0.81 4.23 0.79 –0.45 0.655

I can find average yearly earnings and work requirements 3.98 0.90 4.14 0.83 –1.08 0.283

I can identify employers and firms relevant to my interests 3.29 1.02 3.42 1.11 –0.69 0.494

Overall 3.53 0.66 3.74 0.71 –1.64 0.104

Note. Response choices range from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree.

As students reported a moderate level of career-relevant information, it follows that they were moderately satisfied with the level of information that they possess. When asked to rate their satisfaction on a four-item measure, average scores were moderate at baseline (M = 3.47, SD = 0.85) and post-intervention (M = 3.51, SD = 0.77), with no significant difference across periods, t(128) = –0.29, p = .775.

A range of performances was found on the objective, eight-item Psychology Majors Career Information Quiz measuring knowledge related to educational requirements and the type of work performed in certain professions. Performance was above average at baseline (M = 5.80, SD = 1.43) and post-intervention (M = 6.02, SD = 1.39), with no significant improvement over time, t(129) = –0.87, p = 0.387.

Career Exploration Activities

Students were asked to rate the extent to which they had engaged in different career exploration activities over the past three months. One might assume that, given a moderate level of satisfaction with their current level of information, majors may be engaging in career exploration activities to increase their level of knowledge. To the contrary, few students reported engaging in any such activities. While the overall improvement from baseline (M = 2.34, SD = 0.92) to post-intervention (M = 2.56, SD = 1.03) was not significant, t(128) = –1.26, p = .209, encouraging differences were found in several areas (see Table 8). A notable, yet non-significant, increase was found for students who reported actively investigating career opportunities from M = 2.99 (SD = 1.22) at baseline to M = 3.38 (SD = 1.05) post-intervention, t(128) = –1.86, p = 0.066.
Table 8.
Means, Standard Deviations, and t-Test Results for The Career Exploration Activities Measure

Baseline (n = 83)
Post-Intervention (n = 47)

Item (abbrev.) M SD M SD t p

Investigated career opportunities 2.99 1.22 3.38 1.05 –1.86 0.066

Went to career orientation / information programs 1.54 0.83 1.83 1.14 –1.62 0.107

Obtained information on specific careers, jobs, or companies 2.80 1.32 3.06 1.24 –1.10 0.275

Initiated conversations with knowledgeable individuals 2.77 1.28 2.83 1.34 –0.23 0.819

Obtained information on the labor market 2.39 1.23 2.72 1.29 –1.41 0.160

Experimented with different career activities (shadowed) 2.07 1.29 2.19 1.41 –0.49 0.625

Sought opportunities to demonstrate work-related skills 2.35 1.35 2.30 1.33 0.21 0.834

Tried specific work roles 1.80 0.99 2.15 1.26 –1.71 0.090

Overall 2.34 0.92 2.56 1.03 –1.26 0.209

Note. Response choices range from 1 = Not at all to 5 = A great deal.

In an effort to increase career exploration activities, students are provided with resources to investigate career opportunities as part of the new advisement procedures. While there was not a significant increase in these behaviors post-intervention, students did acknowledge that they were prompted to engage in career exploration activities during their advisement appointments. A significant increase was noted in the percentage of students who reported that their career exploration was the result of information provided during academic advisement from baseline (4.80%) to post-intervention (17.00%), χ²(1, N = 130) = 5.33, p = 0.021.

Perceptions of Advisement

Lastly, students completed a 21-item questionnaire reporting their perceptions of various aspects of the advisement process. On average, students reported positive perceptions of advisement at baseline (M = 3.91, SD = 1.07) and post-intervention (M = 4.04, SD = 0.65), t(128) = –0.74, p = .464. A significant improvement was found for the item, “The Psychology Department advisors treat me with respect,” with average ratings increasing from M = 4.18 (SD = 1.25) at baseline to M = 4.57 (SD = 0.54) post-intervention, t(128) = –1.99, p = 0.049. Average ratings for all other items remained consistent across time periods.

Focus Group Feedback

Data collected in a focus group were overwhelmingly positive. Students in the group reported that the new advisement procedures made them think about post-graduation opportunities, gave them tools to prepare for careers/graduate school, fostered more meaningful relationships with Psychology Department faculty, and improved their perceptions of advisement. While the positive feedback may be, in part, a function of self-selection and demand characteristics, the feedback is consistent with objective findings and illustrates individual positive experiences. Illustrative quotes include the following.

Career /graduate school opportunities and preparation.
• …They [advisors] talk a lot about potential jobs when you are in advisement so when you get home you want to look more into that so you kinda' know what you want to do by your senior year. After the MAP it made me look more at it because I was forced to fill papers out. I don't know what I want to do, so it did encourage me to look more into careers. Before they did it (implemented the MAP), it wasn't a thought in my head.

• I'm a junior and they definitely gave me all the tools to look into graduate school…sites to look at…it's just up to me to actually do it—to see where I want to go in my career. They gave me the right tools. They gave me packets and websites to go on…now I just need to decide exactly where I want to go.

Relationships with faculty.
• We developed a relationship more than just advising…she (the advisor) really goes in-depth with everything. She's always checking on me and asking me, even outside of advisement, how I am. She knows everything.

Discussion

The MAP is an important new tool implemented to improve the career development of undergraduate psychology students. While most analyses yielded insignificant results, there were some small positive changes and positive perceptions after only two semesters of use. One important factor contributing to the limited findings was sample size. The number of students consenting to inclusion in the research was very low. Students who did not consent were able to avoid additional questions, which may have served as an incentive to withhold consent. Future administrations will require students to complete the entire assessment tool and then provide research consent. Moreover, in future analyses, as sample sizes increase, we will examine differences between upper- and lower-division students. Much of the focus of the MAP is post-graduate preparation. As such, it may be that there is a disproportional impact on upper-division students for whom post-graduate planning is more relevant.

The most important area of impact that we have found thus far is that advisement seems to have encouraged active career exploration. The percentage of students who reported that their career exploration activities were prompted by advisement tripled after implementation of the MAP. This result supports our belief that deliberate, strategic, specific, suggestions from a trusted faculty member have great potential to increase career-focused behaviors. This is very encouraging and absolutely one of the most desirable outcomes for the new procedures.

While there were few significant results after the first implementation of the new procedures, we learned several important things that make us hopeful about the long-term impact. Firstly, students who are struggling with career decision-making are largely doing so because they lack information. Secondly, when students are encouraged to seek specific information and engage in specific exploration behaviors during advisement, they do, in fact, engage in career-directed exploration. These deficits in information and exploration are precisely what the MAP is designed to remedy. Finally, our results indicated that students have positive impressions of their advisors and the advisement they are receiving. Although not a primary goal, this last factor is likely to improve advisors’ ability to impart information and change behavior.

Our responsibility as undergraduate psychology faculty is to facilitate the career preparation of all students—regardless of their ultimate profession. Undergraduate students use psychology as a vehicle to enter myriad careers. They enter our programs because they are fascinated by what we teach. But all too often we find that those who do not go on to graduate school in psychology are unhappy and fail to recognize the connection between their jobs and their undergraduate education. Our programs nurture an important set of communication, analytical, ethical, and self-management skills that are highly prized by employers. As faculty, we must find ways to make sure that students realize the value of the skills they acquire and recognize how they might be useful in many careers. The MAP encourages both self-reflection and extensive career exploration. It helps ensure that students seek and utilize the information they need to make career choices that fit their values, abilities, and skills. Moreover, and just as important, the model gives faculty resources to nurture the career development of all students. Although the MAP is still a work in progress and the full impact will not be known for several years, initial feedback is very good. We look forward to additional rounds of advisement and the accumulation of student exposure to the model. We are particularly eager to examine changes in career outcomes as students complete four years of career advisement. We expect to find significant improvements in perceptions, preparation, and post-graduate outcomes.

	Baseline	Post-intervention
Freshman	14	16.70	9	19.10
Sophomore	20	23.80	8	17.00
Junior	22	26.20	13	27.70
Senior	28	33.30	17	36.20
Total	84	100.00	47	100.00

Measure	Sample items
Career Decision Making Difficulty Questionnaire	I find it difficult to make a career decision because I do not know what steps I have to take. I find it difficult to make a career decision because people who are important to me do not agree with the career options I am considering. I find it difficult to make a career decision because I do not have enough information about the variety of occupations or training programs that exist.
Psychology Majors Career Information Quiz (T/F)	To enter a master's degree program in business (MBA), you must have a bachelor's with a major in some business area. The doctor of psychology degree (PsyD) in clinical psychology offers the exact same education and opportunities as a PhD but costs much less to complete.
Satisfaction with Information	How satisfied are you with the amount of information you have on jobs that are congruent with your interests and abilities? How satisfied are you with the amount of information you have about the specific career in which you are interested?
Perceptions of Advisement Questionnaire	Psychology Department advisors help me understand why required courses are important for my professional development and future plans. Psychology Department advisors have assisted me in developing a long-term career plan. Psychology Department advisors assist in career guidance.

Domain	Sample items
Old versus new advisement	What changes have you noticed in academic advising? How satisfied are you with the level/type of information you are receiving in advisement now compared to the old advisement?
Questions about advisement	Has advisement encouraged you explore career options? What have you done to research careers in the last few months? Have your advisors helped you consider and plan for careers that are NOT in the field of psychology? Has advisement and/or the career exploration activities suggested by your advisor led you to be more certain about your career choice?
Questions about internship/graduate school/employment	How has advisement helped you prepare for internship/senior project? What information was useful to you either in preparing for graduate school or searching for graduate school options? How has advisement helped you prepare for employment after graduation?
Questions about advisors	How have your advisors been most helpful to you? What problems/challenges have you encountered in advisement? Have you had any negative experiences or frustrations in relation to advisement?

	Baseline
1. I do not even have a general direction	6	7.10	3	6.40
2. I have a general direction	18	21.40	8	17.00
3. I am deliberating on a small number of careers	15	17.90	6	12.80
4. I am considering a specific career but exploring options	22	26.20	18	38.30
5. I am sure and confident	23	27.40	12	25.50
Total	84	100.00	47	100.00

	Baseline (n = 24)	Post-intervention (n = 11)
Lack of information	4.55	1.76	5.08	1.33	–0.90	0.376
Intra/interpersonal conflict	3.77	1.28	4.05	1.51	–0.58	0.563
Overall	4.30	1.36	4.76	1.30	–0.95	0.351

	Baseline	Post-intervention
How much information do you have on what a person does [tasks] in the career area(s) you are considering?
1. Little	5	6.00	3	6.40
2. Some	16	19.30	6	12.80
3. A moderate amount	35	42.20	15	31.90
4. A great deal	23	27.70	18	38.30
5. A tremendous amount	4	4.80	5	10.60
Total	83	100.00	47	100.00
How much information do you have about the demands, requirements, and preparation needed for the career area(s) you are considering?
1. Little	6	7.30	3	6.50
2. Some	15	18.30	8	17.40
3. A moderate amount	36	43.90	15	32.60
4. A great deal	19	23.20	13	28.30
5. A tremendous amount	6	7.30	7	15.20
Total	82	100.00	46	100.00

	Baseline (n = 83)	Post-intervention (n = 47)
I understand the kind of work done by different psychologists	3.89	0.64	4.06	0.82	–1.33	0.187
I know what steps to take to become a psychologist	3.64	0.94	3.79	1.04	–0.83	0.408
I know how to prepare for and get admitted to grad school	3.13	1.15	3.36	1.21	–1.06	0.290
I can identify fields of study that allow me to do counseling	3.23	0.97	3.72	0.88	–2.90	0.004
I can identify helping professions outside psychology	3.17	1.02	3.49	0.95	–1.76	0.081
I can identify areas in business in which psychology is valuable	3.28	1.06	3.38	1.13	–0.53	0.595
I can find information online about careers of interest	4.17	0.81	4.23	0.79	–0.45	0.655
I can find average yearly earnings and work requirements	3.98	0.90	4.14	0.83	–1.08	0.283
I can identify employers and firms relevant to my interests	3.29	1.02	3.42	1.11	–0.69	0.494
Overall	3.53	0.66	3.74	0.71	–1.64	0.104

	Baseline (n = 83)	Post-Intervention (n = 47)
Investigated career opportunities	2.99	1.22	3.38	1.05	–1.86	0.066
Went to career orientation / information programs	1.54	0.83	1.83	1.14	–1.62	0.107
Obtained information on specific careers, jobs, or companies	2.80	1.32	3.06	1.24	–1.10	0.275
Initiated conversations with knowledgeable individuals	2.77	1.28	2.83	1.34	–0.23	0.819
Obtained information on the labor market	2.39	1.23	2.72	1.29	–1.41	0.160
Experimented with different career activities (shadowed)	2.07	1.29	2.19	1.41	–0.49	0.625
Sought opportunities to demonstrate work-related skills	2.35	1.35	2.30	1.33	0.21	0.834
Tried specific work roles	1.80	0.99	2.15	1.26	–1.71	0.090
Overall	2.34	0.92	2.56	1.03	–1.26	0.209

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Marya Howell-Carter is Associate Professor of Psychology and Acting Chairperson at the Department of Psychology, Farmingdale State College, USA. She received her BSEd, MA, and PhD from the Northwestern University, MA. Her areas of specialization/research are adolescent therapy, psychological concerns in college students, family therapy, anxiety, and psychology pedagogy. She teaches courses in Abnormal Psychology, Introduction to Psychology, Child Development, Lifespan Development, Individual and Group Counseling, Multicultural Psychology, the Psychology of Women, and Internship/Senior Project I and II.

Jennifer Nieman-Gonder is Associate Professor of Psychology and Acting Director of the Applied Psychology Program at the Department of Psychology, Farmingdale State College, USA She received her BA, MA, and PhD from Hofstra University. Her areas of specialization/research are industrial/organizational psychology, performance evaluation and feedback, leadership development, work motivation, and customer satisfaction. She teaches courses in Introduction to Psychology, I/O Psychology, Organizational Behavior, Statistics, Research Methods, and Internship/Senior Project I and II.

Jennifer Pellegrino is a recent graduate of the Applied Psychology Program at Farmingdale State College, USA.

Brittani Catapano is a recent graduate of the Applied Psychology Program at Farmingdale State College, USA.

Kimberly Hutzel is a recent graduate of the Applied Psychology Program at Farmingdale State College, USA.

Appendix

References

Aellig A. L., Dickson, S. J., Dwyer, M. E., & Francis, C. L. (2008). Academic Advisors are Put to the Test, Honesty is Brutal: Reliability and Validity of an Instrument to Assess Academic Advising. Epistimi. Retrieved from: http://www.capital.edu/68/Arts-and-Sciences/23608/.

American Psychological Association. (2013). Guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf.

American Psychological Association. (2014). Center for Workforce Studies FAQs. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/support/statistics.aspx.

Appleby, D. C. (2000, Spring). Job skills valued by employers who interview psychology majors. Eye on Psi Chi, 4, 17. Retrieved from http://www.psichi.org/?page=043EyeSpring00aApple&hhSearchTerms=appleby#!.

Appleby, D. C., & Appleby, K. M. (2006). Kisses of death in the graduate school application process. Teaching of Psychology, 33, 19–24. Retrieved from http://www.unl.edu/psypage/psichi/Graduate_School_Application_Kisses_of_Death.pdf.

Borden

V. M. H.

Rajecki

D. W.

(2000) First-year employment outcomes of psychology baccalaureates: Relatedness, preparation, and prospects. Teaching of Psychology 27: 164–168.

Creamer

D. G.

Creamer

E. G.

(1994) Practicing developmental advising: Theoretical contexts and functional applications. NACADA Journal 14: 17–24.

Crookston

B. B.

(2009) A developmental view of academic advising as teaching. NACADA Journal 29: 78–82.

Dunn

D. S.

McCarthy

M. A.

Baker

Halonen

J. S.

Hill

G. W.

(2007) Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist 62: 650–670.

10.

Gati

Krausz

Osipow

S. H.

(1996) A taxonomy of difficulties in career decision-making. Journal of Counseling Psychology 43: 510–526.

11.

Gati

Osipow

S. H.

Krausz

Saka

(2000) Validity of the career decision-making difficulties questionnaire: Counselee versus career counselor perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior 56: 99–113.

12.

Halonen, J. S. (2011). Are there too many psychology majors? White paper prepared for the State of the State University System of Florida Board of Governors. Retrieved from http://www.cogdop.org/page_attachments/0000/0200/FLA_White_Paper_for_cogop_posting.pdf.

13.

Halonen, J. S. (2013). The worthies vs. the great unwashed: Overcoming psychology’s tier problem. Eye on Psi Chi, 17, 11–12. Retrieved from http://www.psichi.org/?page=172EyeWin13aHalonen&hhSearchTerms=%22halonen%22.

14.

National Science Foundation (2010). National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, National Survey of Recent College Graduates. Retrieved from https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/recentgrads/2010/html/RCG2010_DST27.html.

15.

Pozzebon

J. A.

Visser

B. A.

Ashton

M. C.

Lee

Goldberg

L. R.

(2010) Psychometric characteristics of a public-domain self-report measure of vocational interests: The Oregon vocational interests scales. Journal of Personality Assessment 92: 1–13.

16.

Stumpf

S. A.

Colarelli

S. M.

Hartman

(1983) Development of the career exploration survey (CES). Journal of Vocational Behavior 22: 191–226.

17.

Thomas, J. H., & McDaniel, C. R. (2004). Effectiveness of a course in career planning for psychology majors. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 22–26.

18.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Table 322.10: Bachelor's degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions, by field of study: Selected years, 1970–71 through 2013–14. In U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (Ed.), Digest of Education Statistics (2015 ed.). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_322.10.asp?current=yes.

19.

Virginia Department of Education. (nd). Values assessment [Measurement Instrument]. Retrieved from http://www.careeronestop.org/explorecareers/assessments/work-values.aspx.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.30 MB

	Baseline		Post-intervention
Class standing	f	%	f	%
Freshman	14	16.70	9	19.10
Sophomore	20	23.80	8	17.00
Junior	22	26.20	13	27.70
Senior	28	33.30	17	36.20
Total	84	100.00	47	100.00

	Baseline		Post-intervention
Response choice	f	%	f	%
1. I do not even have a general direction	6	7.10	3	6.40
2. I have a general direction	18	21.40	8	17.00
3. I am deliberating on a small number of careers	15	17.90	6	12.80
4. I am considering a specific career but exploring options	22	26.20	18	38.30
5. I am sure and confident	23	27.40	12	25.50
Total	84	100.00	47	100.00

	Baseline (n = 24)		Post-intervention (n = 11)
Dimension	M	SD	M	SD	t	p
Lack of information	4.55	1.76	5.08	1.33	–0.90	0.376
Intra/interpersonal conflict	3.77	1.28	4.05	1.51	–0.58	0.563
Overall	4.30	1.36	4.76	1.30	–0.95	0.351

	Baseline (n = 83)		Post-intervention (n = 47)
Item (abbrev.)	M	SD	M	SD	t	p
I understand the kind of work done by different psychologists	3.89	0.64	4.06	0.82	–1.33	0.187
I know what steps to take to become a psychologist	3.64	0.94	3.79	1.04	–0.83	0.408
I know how to prepare for and get admitted to grad school	3.13	1.15	3.36	1.21	–1.06	0.290
I can identify fields of study that allow me to do counseling	3.23	0.97	3.72	0.88	–2.90	0.004
I can identify helping professions outside psychology	3.17	1.02	3.49	0.95	–1.76	0.081
I can identify areas in business in which psychology is valuable	3.28	1.06	3.38	1.13	–0.53	0.595
I can find information online about careers of interest	4.17	0.81	4.23	0.79	–0.45	0.655
I can find average yearly earnings and work requirements	3.98	0.90	4.14	0.83	–1.08	0.283
I can identify employers and firms relevant to my interests	3.29	1.02	3.42	1.11	–0.69	0.494
Overall	3.53	0.66	3.74	0.71	–1.64	0.104

The Psychology Department Model Advisement Procedure: A Comprehensive,Systematic Approach to Career Development Advisement

Abstract

Keywords

Method

Participants

Population

Sample

Materials and Measures

Career certainty

Level of information

Career exploration

Perceptions of advisement

Focus group

Design and Procedure

Results

Career Certainty

Level of Information

Career Exploration Activities

Perceptions of Advisement

Focus Group Feedback

Discussion