as feasibility of training, expense, parental expectations, and job
prospects (see points 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10).
If K does not do his homework, this might mean that he is not
yet “ready” for career choice and decision. I would summarize his
“long list” with him and advise him to keep thinking about the dif-
ferent possibilities and then return for further career counseling
after his sophomore year. His strong interest in skateboarding might
still be a hangover from high school. I would check it out thor-
oughly as a career interest. (Would K consider skateboarding as a
career? How good is he? Has he participated in any contests, won
any prizes? How good does he think he is? See points 5, 6, 7, and 8.)
Finally, the data do not indicate the presence of any significant
mental health problem.
The Case of E
“E” will now refer to the client, not to environment, as it does in
PEC theory.
E appears to be at a later career development stage than K, that
is, in a pre-establishment stage. Or at least she is looking for “a few
viable occupational alternatives” to make educational planning eas-
ier (more comfortable).
If E were not in a hurry, it may be useful to ascertain her values
via more than one medium—for example, by discussing the rein-
forcement capabilities of the various environments she is currently
experiencing and, through her comments, developing a clearer idea
of what she requires of an occupational environment.
From the data on hand, it appears that Altruism is a very strong
value for E, so much so that it poses that inevitable potential con-
flict: “helping others” in a career versus “helping others” in one’s
own family.
E’s ability level is high enough for her to pursue most any pro-
fessional-level occupation. One way to narrow down her occupa-
tional choices would be to use empirically keyed interest scales,
such as are found in the Strong Interest Inventory or the Kuder
462 CAREER CHOICE AND DEVELOPMENT