Student Perceptions of Career Choices: The Impact of Academic Major

Transcription

1 Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences Education, 27(2), 2009 Student Perceptions of Career Choices: The Impact of Academic Major Ning-Kuang Chuang Kathleen Walker Natalie Caine-Bish Kent State University The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of academic majors on students career development. This study collected data from 50 upperdivision students enrolled in classes related to the three majors, Hospitality Management, Human Development and Family Studies, and Nutrition and Dietetics, in the School of Family and Consumer Studies at a university in northeastern Ohio. Results of this study revealed significant differences among these three majors on the variables, including career decision self-efficacy, career outcome expectations, and commitment to career choices. Results also reinforced the role of faculty advisors in students career planning and choice behaviors. Recommendations for FCS educators in students career assistance were provided in this study. For many university students at the time of graduation, getting a job is foremost in their minds. A sound education can give students greater career opportunities and prepare them to make significant contributions in their chosen field. A survey conducted by the Corporate Institutional Research Program (CIRP) and sponsored by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Council on Education (ACE) in 992, indicated a major reason for freshmen to go to college was to get training for a specific career. Career training has continued to remain important among students (CIRP, 2008). According to Riggenbach (2008), students of today enter college with an understanding of the industry that correlates with their chosen major, but it is the students values that are the determinant of their career choices. Gore (2002) indicated that students intentions to decide upon an occupation are associated with their chosen majors. When referring to university education, it is important that students are prepared for the workplace, which should include appropriate career related assistance and guidance (Smith, 200). Once students enroll in a program at a university, their selection of an academic major will influence their career choice and planning and vice versa. Leppel (200) reported that students who choose academic majors that are profession oriented may have a greater commitment to their career goals. Family and Consumer Studies (FCS) programs house very diverse areas that together contribute to the discipline s mission and focus on the well-being of individuals, families, and communities (Hitch & Youatt, 2002). The emphasis on enhancing the well-being of individuals, families, and communities shared by these areas of specialization, as well as their inherent differences may be reflected in the career choices and behaviors of the students attracted to the specific majors in FCS. However, the specific program areas approaches for doing so are vastly different. In Human Development and Family Studies (HDFS) programs, students are provided with a strong foundation in the dynamics of interpersonal relationships and human development across the lifespan. In Hospitality Management (), students are equipped with knowledge and 8

2 skills required by the industry that is either associated with specific industry areas (such as food service or lodging) or functional areas (such as accounting, marketing, or management). Nutrition and Dietetics () includes areas in clinical nutrition and community nutrition that encompass wellness and disease prevention and focus on educating individuals, families and organizations. Understanding students career development may help university advisors and faculty in HDFS,, and better prepare students for a successful transition from student to professional. The purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of the effects of contextual/external factors (academic majors) on students career development and to recommend educational strategies that will encourage students to make career plans more effectively. The current investigation utilized components of the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) as a framework to understand students career efficacy beliefs, expectations, and commitments toward their career choices. Two social cognitive variables, including career decision self-efficacy and career outcome expectations as well as the variable of commitment to career choices, were employed to assess students career development process. As a result, the following research questions guided our study: Does academic major affect students career behaviors with respect to making career decisions and seeking career assistance? Do students academic majors significantly affect students career decision self-efficacy, career outcome expectations, and vocational exploration and commitment? If yes, in which areas of career development (or career variables) do students show differences across the three majors in, HDFS, and? Conceptual Framework Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) is widely used for making predictions about people s occupational considerations (Gore & Leuwerke, 2000), academic achievement (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 994), as well as career and academic behaviors (Barak, 98). Social cognitive career theory emphasizes several cognitive variables, including self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and choice goals, which are associated with academic performance, as well as persistence behavior. Furthermore, Super (963) stated that both internal (personal attributes) and external (environmental and social context) factors within the transition stages will influence individuals career choices and decisions as well as their career/vocational behaviors. One component of SCCT is self-efficacy, which was defined by Bandura (986) as individual s ability to judge his or her capabilities to perform specific actions or designated functions. Outcome expectations are described as an individual s belief concerning the consequence or outcome from completing a specific action. (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2002). According to Lent and Brown (996), individuals who have a higher self-efficacy and anticipate positive outcomes will support higher goals, which in turn will also promote and sustain positive performance. The variable of career exploration and commitment is about the courage of individuals to test, explore, and attach to career choices based upon career preferences (Blustein, Ellis, & Devenis, 989). According to Social Cognitive Career Theory, personal inputs (e.g., gender, race, and personality), contextual factors (e.g., social/academic status, culture, and family), and learning experiences (e.g., work experiences) influence career behaviors in important ways. Career choices are formulated through different processes and can be influenced by various factors or associated with different variables (Ginzberg, Gingburg, Axelrad, & Herma, 95; Gordon, 995; Jones, Gorman, & Schroeder, 989; Orndorff & Herr, 996; Super, 957). It may be that universities can provide one of the best environments for such assistance in students career 9

3 development and in promoting their cognitive competence in career decision-making skills, career exploration, and career planning. Method Sample For the present study, we surveyed undergraduate students at a university in northeastern Ohio enrolled in classes related to the three majors, Hospitality Management, Human Development and Family Studies, and Nutrition and Dietetics, in the School of Family and Consumer Studies. Data were collected on a voluntary basis, in the form of self-report measures during fall semester The participants surveyed were upper-division (e.g., junior, senior, and post undergraduate) students in one of the three majors because they would be making career decisions in a year and/or would soon be in the transition stage from school to work. Scales and Data Analysis Three questionnaires, the Career Decision Self-Efficacy Short Form (CDSE-SF) (Taylor & Betz, 983), Career Outcome Expectations (COE), and Commitment to Career Choices (CCC) scale (Blustein et al., 989) were employed for this study. Background information on the students consisted of two sections: (a) students demographic information and (b) career behavior information. Among these questionnaires, the COE scale, initially created by Hackett, Betz, Casas, and Rocha-Singh (992), was expanded from 2 items to 25 items by the first author of this article. The additional items were created by reviewing existing career-related literature for college students, Bandura s outcome expectations (986), and expert interviews with academic educators and career advisors to increase face validity of the survey items. Self-efficacy is a person s beliefs about his or her capabilities. Betz and Hackett (98) who found personal efficacy expectations are related to the career choice process. Career decision self-efficacy is not simply investigating individuals confidence in making career decisions, but also involves measures of career maturity in terms of self-appraisal, vocational information seeking, career planning, problem-solving, and goal selection (Luzzo, 993). Career self-efficacy also serves as a mediator to motivate people to achieve special goals, such as pursuing a career in particular areas (Feltz & Payment, 2005). Bandura (986) described outcome expectations as one s beliefs concerning the probable outcomes of particular actions. The best expression describing outcome expectations is If I do this, what will happen? (Lent et al., 994, p. 83). Outcome expectations, in response to vocational behavior, help to determine career goals and interests (Gore & Leuwerke, 2000). Outcome expectations, according to Bandura (986; 997), occur in three forms through learned experiences, which are physical (i.e., work environment), social (i.e., recognition), and selfevaluative (i.e., satisfaction) (Smith, 200). Commitment to career choices is defined as the ability of an individual to determine his or her job preferences, as well as to have a strong affiliation with specific occupational goals (Blustein et al., 989). Commitment to career choices includes: the tendency to foreclose, a stable ego identity without exploration of career choices and whether a person is in exploration or commitment of his/her career choices (Blustein et al., 989). Foreclosure also leads students to making career choices without a sufficient and open self-appraisal process (Bluestein, Pauling, DeMania, & Faye, 994). The reliability and validity for CDSE, COE, and CCC have been confirmed by previous researchers (Betz, 2000; Betz & Luzzo, 996; Blustein et al., 989; Gore & Leuwerke, 2000). In 20

4 this study, a Cronbach s reliability test was performed to measure the internal consistency of each of the scales used. Descriptive statistics were included to summarize and compare students career choices and seek help behaviors across three majors in HDFS,, and. Two analysis of variances (ANOVA) were computed to examine the effects of academic major on the three career-related variables, including career decision self-efficacy, career outcome expectations, and commitment to career choices. Discussions on each individual item, as well as a set of variables within each subscale will be included. Quality Measurement The mean, standard deviation, and the alpha value of coefficient for each scale were CDSE (α =.92, M = 3.98, SD = 0.50), COE (α =.93, M = 5.33, SD = 0.78), and CCC (α =.87, M = 3.22, SD = 0.70) respectively. Results of reliability tests indicated all measurements used in this study were highly reliable. Results This study s participants consisted of 50 undergraduate students of which, 46% were Hospitality Management () students (n = 69), 34% were Nutrition/Dietetics () students (n = 5), and 20% were Human Development & Family Studies (HDFS) students (n = 30). Sixtyone percent of the students participating in this study were seniors (n = 92), 34% were juniors (n = 5), and 3% were post-undergraduate students (n = 4). The post-undergraduate students that participated in this investigation were similar to the junior and senior status students because of the coursework level they were in with respect to their major change. The mean age of students was (SD = 4.87), and mean grade point average (on a four point scale) was 2.98 (SD = 0.6). The average number of work hours each week was 7 hours for HDFS students (n = 25), hours for students (n = 56), and 2.2 hours of paid employment and 2 hour of volunteering for students (n = 32). Additional descriptive information as well as career related activities are included in Table. Table Career Related Activities by Academic Major HDFS Current work experiences Currently not employed Currently employed in the field Currently employed in unrelated fields Career Decision Influence Myself Parents Relatives Friends Faculty Employers Others Seek career help Yes No N = 30 % n = 69 % n = 5 %

5 Sources for career help School career center College advisor Department faculty advisor Course instructors Others Note. HDFS = human development & family studies; = hospitality management; = nutrition/dietetics. Some categories did not match up to the total student numbers are due to the missing data. When looking at the academic major differences in the subscales for career decision selfefficacy, career outcome expectations, and commitment to career choices, ANOVA analysis revealed significant differences only on three of the COE subscales: () physical variables, F (2, 46) = 7.44, p <.00; (2) person/family/work variables, F (2, 46) = 38.39, p <.00; and (3) social variables, F (2, 46) = 3.86, p <.0. These findings revealed that HDFS differed from and students and have lowest mean scores (M = 4.73, SD =.0) in their expectation in physical work outcome variables. students differed from HDFS and students and have lowest mean score in their perceptions of personal/family/work balance variables (M = 3.69, SD =.26), but highest mean scores in the social approval/position (M = 5.72, SD =.9). However, students participating in this study did not show significant difference on rest of the variables, including career decision self-efficacy and commitment to career choices, as well as self-evaluation in the career outcome expectation scale. When looking at the specific area where students differ in their career planning process across the three majors, ANOVA analysis revealed significant academic differences on the specific activities summarized in Table 2. Table 2 Mean Differences Across Three Majors on Each Item Within Each Subscale in CDSE, COE, and CCC Items/Scale (subscale) CDSE. Successfully manage the job interview well (career planning) 2. Identify some reasonable major or career alternatives if you are unable to get your first career choices (problem-solving) Pooled Mean Highest Mean Major Lowest Mean Major p.04*.03* COE 3. Allows me to succeed in a well-paying job (Physical) 4. Allow me to have enough time to be with my family and friends (person/family/work) 5. Allow me to have enough time to pursue my leisure activities (person/family/work) 6. Allow me to achieve a balance in my personal and professional life (person/family/work) 7. Allows me to maintain steady and secure employment (Physical) 8. Provide me the kind of lifestyle I want (Physical) HDFS HDFS.000***.005***.002***.000***.000***.000*** 22

6 9. Allow me to be contributor of a management team (social) 0. Provide me with good opportunities for ownership / entrepreneurship (social) HDFS.05*.00** CCCS. The chances are excellent that I will actually end up doing the kind of work that I most want to do. (VEC) 2. It is hard for me to decide on a career goal because it seems that there are too many possibilities (VEC) 3. I think that a wavering or indecisive approach to educational and career choices is a sign of weakness; one should take a stand and follow through with it no matter what. (TTF) 4. I believe that no matter what others might think, my educational and career decisions will either be right or wrong (TTF) HDFS HDFS HDFS.0*.04*.027*.044* Note. CDSE = Career decision self-efficacy; COE = Career outcome expectation; CCCS = Commitment to career choices scale; TTF = Tendency to foreclose; VEC = Vocational exploration and commitment; = Hospitality management; HDFS = Human development & Family Studies; = Nutrition & Dietetics. High score in VEC means high commitment to career choices; high score in TTF means higher tendency to foreclose in career exploration. * p <.05 **p <.0 *** p <.00 Discussion This study investigated the effects of academic majors on two social cognitive career variables (career decision self-efficacy and career outcome expectations), as well as other career related behavior (commitment to career choices). Results of this study revealed differences among these three majors on the variables, including career decision self-efficacy, career outcome expectations, and commitment to career choices. With regard to career decision-making, students in this study identified themselves as the most influential factor in making career decisions. Aycan and Fikret-Pasa (2003) have explained that students may adopt suggestions from significant professional contacts, like faculty, but claim those suggestions as their own. Additionally, students also reported they value faculty opinions while making career choices and both college and department advisors were important while seeking career help. Bandura s (986) Social Cognitive Theory provides insight into these findings. According the theory, students decision-making ability is viewed as a learning process and can be reinforced or refined through many ways, such as role models, faculty advising, or inspirational talk from leaders in the field. Cox and Orehovec (2007) and Kramer (2003) describe the importance of faculty-student interactions in improving students personal growth, career and academic goals, as well as their determination in continuing with his specific major. Human Development & Family Studies Students Students in HDFS reported concerns related to their career outcome expectations. HDFS students scored significantly lower than and students on items related to compensation and other physical and social benefits of their career choices. Specifically, HDFS students are not confident their chosen careers will allow them to succeed in a well-paying job, provide them with the kind of lifestyle they desire, and provide them with opportunities for ownership or entrepreneurship. This finding may reflect the students perception of the average salaries of professionals working in human service agencies, many of which are non-profit organizations. 23

7 Faculty and professionals in the field often advise students that this is not a profession to pursue if a high salary is the only goal. HDFS students scored lowest on two items related to commitment to career choices. These students are not confident they will end up doing the kind of work they most want to do. However, they also do not think that that a wavering or indecisive approach to educational and career choices is a sign of weakness or that one should take a stand and follow through with it no matter what. Thus, these students are not likely to foreclose on their career choices. The extremely broad nature of the field helps explain these findings. HDFS students have an enormous variety of careers from which to choose. The services provided, the populations served, and the settings in which it all takes place encompass numerous and diverse opportunities for HDFS students. As students approach graduation, the choices can be daunting and may explain why they are not confident they will end up doing the kind of work they most want to do. Many of them have not identified what kind of work they most want to do. At the same time, HDFS students may recognize that being flexible and having a willingness to explore multiple options could serve them well in the job search. Hospitality Management Students When compared to HDFS and students, students were found most committed to their career choices. This can be explained by their current work experiences. Results revealed that the majority of students were more likely to be employed already in career-related positions than HDFS and students. The career and professional-oriented classes offered by the hospitality management program and internship requirement may also provide reasonable support for this finding. Thus, the relationship between academic major and career choice was confirmed which in turn, has an impact on students career planning behaviors. According to Pavesic and Brymer (989), hospitality graduates entering the industry often have preestablished perceptions and expectations of the industry imprinted by their education and work experiences. The work experiences or industry shadowing experiences (vicarious learning) is helpful in a person s decision-making ability and persistence behavior as suggested by Bandura s (986) Social Cognitive Theory. When compared on specific items in career decision self-efficacy, students have the highest mean score in both managing job interview well and identify other career alternatives if unable to get first career choices. Tourism and hospitality are the second largest private employers in the United States (Hayes & Ninemeier, 2004). students may be aware of the abundant career opportunities available to them in the service industry and feel less threatened by not obtaining their initial career choices. With regard to career outcome expectations, students had the lowest mean scores in job security and conflicts among personal/family/professional life. Even though the industry provides numerous opportunities for ownership/entrepreneurship, there are some drawbacks working in the hospitality industry. students are aware of the need to work long hours and during holidays. These signify a sacrifice of personal life, an imbalance between family and work time, and a lack of time for leisure activities. The lack of security and steady employment is another disadvantage that concerns students. Both the economy and the nature of the industry (e.g., low pay, long hours, intensive labor, competition, and limited career advancement) play a significant role in the industry s workforce movement and retention. In terms of commitment to career choices, had the highest mean scores in I will end up doing the work that I most want to do. For students, the high commitment to their career 24

8 choices may well reveal the close relationship between their academic major and the corresponding careers in the hospitality industry. That is, students entered the academic majors knowing what they want to do in the future. However, results of this study also revealed that that had the highest intention to foreclose their career choices. This was reflected in two items: a wavering to career choices is a sign of weakness and my educational and career decisions will either be right or wrong. students participating in this study may pre-establish their career goals without a full exploration of the career choices in the field. As Blustein et al. (989) stated students who are confident about their career preference have firm attachments to their career goal. O Mahony et al. (200) also stated that students who decide to major in hotel or hospitality management are motivated by what they expect to be their career outcomes (as cited in Raybould & Wilkins, 2005). This study s findings suggest that the variable of career outcome expectations is the anchor variable and can be used to enhance both students career intentions and commitment toward career choices. Hospitality students current work experiences, including internship and practicum, help students understand the industry better and reinforce their retention in the industry. Current researchers have concluded that these practical experiences can lead to higher satisfaction in students first jobs in the hospitality industry (Self, 2005) and result in a lower turnover in the industry (Kang & Gould, 2002). Nutrition and Dietetics Students For students, most do not have work experience in the field of nutrition prior to graduation. This is primarily because of the registration and licensure requirement in the state of Ohio to practice nutrition and dietetics (ODA, 2008). Therefore, unlike HDFS and, the students in nutrition have difficulty getting experience in the field unless they are working directly with a dietitian or in a volunteer capacity. Volunteering during undergraduate work in is almost expected and it was not anticipated to have such a low percentage of students list volunteer work in the field because of the number of students volunteering in department-related nutrition outreach activities. Volunteer/paid work experience is listed together on the national application for internship matching in dietetics, which may mean that students listed their work differently, which may have led them to not report all their current work in the field (ADA, 2008). Many students are working in healthcare and foodservice fields, which tangentially help to prepare them for their future careers. Most students in reported that they were the primary influence in making their career decision. Because of the nature of the field, many students have not had exposure to the career as a registered dietitian before they begin college, but the subject area of nutrition is the reason for interest in nutrition as a major. This also probably related to the reason why majors scored the lowest in the CDSE scores with respect to the other majors. Students in choose the major because of the subject area and then through the experience as a nutrition and dietetic student, students become aware through faculty what the field entails, including the need for an internship and credentialing to practice dietetics. This may leave students with a feeling of being stuck in the major without any other options for other careers with their major because of the credentialing. In most states, individuals cannot practice dietetics without a license, which means to receive a license someone must be a registered dietitian. Students in scored high on the COE questions that related to a career that would lead to a well paying job that allowed them flexibility and family/leisure time with respect to HDFS and. is a field that is primarily a female workforce of which many of the career options are part-time and/or flexible, which allows students the opportunity to succeed in a career in, 25

9 as well as have a family and leisure activities. This may be appealing to students who in the future wish to balance a career and family. Low scores on the COE questions that relate to steady employment and entrepreneurial opportunities are also not surprising because Northeast Ohio has a high percentage of programs, which leads to a high percentage of graduating making it a competitive environment if students want to stay in the area and want to begin their career in a full-time job. Implications The results of this study suggest academic major plays an important role in students career choice behavior. Students rely on faculty expertise to help them make well-informed career goals. Differences in the academic areas and related professions impact students career decision self-efficacy, career outcome expectations, and vocational exploration and commitment. University students are in the process of confirming their career choices and implementing their career goals. Their career behaviors are shaped by the learning experiences unique to each program. Because of the variation in career behavior across the majors (even though they are all within FCS), program-specific advising is recommended in order to accommodate students career assistance needs. Increased awareness among faculty members of their role in providing career assistance is important. Professional advisors at the School or College levels may be helpful as students enter the University and begin the transition from high school to college. However, as these same students make the transition from college to the professional work world, faculty advisors are required to play an increasingly greater role in the career planning of their students. Helping students schedule their classes according to established curriculum guidelines is only the first step. By working closely with professional counselors in their College or University's career services department and partnering with high-quality professionals in the field, faculty advisors can better meet the career assistance needs of their students. It is recommended that faculty advisors equip themselves with up-to-date career-related knowledge. For example, an awareness of employer expectations, typical compensation packages, regional needs, and economic challenges and opportunities will help faculty members provide students with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions. Students across the three majors revealed significant differences in the variable of career outcome expectations. These expectations affect how students prepare for their future jobs. Thus, it is important to help students build a realistic understanding of their respective fields. Recent program graduates successfully working in their fields, as well as long-term professionals serve as rich sources of information for current students. Traditional supervision in field experiences, invited speakers, and mentoring programs can help faculty members provide their students with realistic career expectations. Increasing awareness of transferable skills also may be essential for all FCS students. While students rely on faculty career assistance and guidance, they should be encouraged to fully explore the career options in their respective fields and keep themselves flexible with transferable skills so that they can find their place within the ever-changing job market. Luzzo (2000) concluded that many students would benefit from career exploration and planning activities that emphasize a comprehensive self-evaluation of skills and values and an orientation to fundamental career decision-making principles. Professional development courses that require students to consider their options as they look forward to graduation could meet this important need. 26

10 Conclusion and Limitations Providing career assistance will be a new endeavor for some faculty members and a more familiar effort to others, but based on the current study, faculty advisors clearly have an important role to play in the career development of their students. Educators in Family and Consumer Studies are encouraged to consider the impact of students academic choices on their career development and to assist students as they navigate the transition from student to professional. Although the framework of this study was based on a well-developed theory, a number of limitations need to be acknowledged. First, the convenience sampling method adopted by this study limited the generalization of the findings. Second, the scope and interpretation of the results were limited to one career development theory, the Social Cognitive Career Theory. Results of this study suggest the need for larger sample with equal sized groups of students from each academic major to substantiate our career-related findings and the impact of academic majors on career behaviors. References American Dietetic Association. (2008). Retrieved 2/5/ Aycan, Z., & Fikret-Pasa, S. (2003). Career choices, job selection criteria, and leadership preferences in a transitional nation: The case of Turkey. Journal of Career Development, 30(2), pp Bandura, A. (986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company. Barak, A. (98). Vocational interests: A cognitive view. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 9, - 4. Betz, N. E. (2000). Career assessment: A review of critical issues. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (2 nd ed., pp ). New York: Wiley. Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (98). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, Betz, N. E., & Luzzo, D. A. (996). Career assessment and the Career Decision-Making Self- Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4(4), Blustein, D. L., Ellis, M. V., & Devenis, L. E. (989). The development and validation of a twodimensional model of the commitment to career choices process (Monograph). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 35, Blustein, D. L., Pauling, M. L., DeMania, M. E., & Faye, M. (994). Relation between exploratory and choice factors and decisional progress. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44,

11 Cox, B. E., & Orehovec, E. (2007). Faculty-student interaction outside the classroom: A Typology from a residential college. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), pp Cooperative Institutional Research Program: CIRP Freshmen Survey. Retrieved July 4, 2008 from Feltz, D. L., & Payment, C. A. (2005). Self-efficacy beliefs related to movement and mobility National Association for Kinesiology and Physical Education in Higher Education, 57, Ginzberg, E., Gingburg, S. W., Axelrad, S., & Herma, J. (95). Occupational Choice, Columbia University Press, New York, NY. Gordon, V. N. (995). The Undecided College Student. Charles C. Thomas publisher, Springfield, IL. Gore, P. A. (2002). Recommendations for promoting the career development of first year students. The First-Year Assessment Listserv, November. Gore, P. A., & Leuwerke, W. C. (2000). Predicting occupational considerations: A comparison of self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and person-environment congruence. Journal of Career Assessment, 8 (3), Hayes, D. K., & Ninemeier, J. D. (2004) Hotel Operations Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Hackett, G., Betz, N., Casas, J. M., & Rocha-Singh, I. A. (992). Gender, ethnicity, and social cognitive factors predicting the academic achievement of students in engineering. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, Hitch, E. J., & Youatt, J. P. (2002). Communicating Family and Consumer Studies. Tinley Park, IL: Goodheart-Willcox. Jones, L. K., Gorman, S., & Schroeder, C. G. (989). A comparison between the SDS and the career key among career undecided college students. The Career Development Quarterly, 37, Kang, S. K., & Gould, R. (2002). Hospitality graduates employment status and job satisfaction. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 4(4), -8. Kramer, G. L. (2003). Faculty Advising Examined. Boston, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (996). Social cognitive approach to career development: An overview. Career Development Quarterly, 44, Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. (Monograph) Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social Cognitive Career Theory. In D. Brown & Associates, Career choice and development (4 th ed., pp ), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 28

12 Leppel, K. (200). The impact of major on college persistence among freshmen. Higher Education, 4, pp Luzzo, D. A. (993). Value of career decision-making self-efficacy in predicting career decision making attitudes and skills. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 400, Luzzo, D. A. (2000). Career development of returning-adult and graduate students. In D.A. Luzzo (Ed.), Career counseling of college students. (pp ). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Ohio Dietetic Association. (2008). Retrieved 2/5/2008 from Orndorff, R. M., & Herr, E. L. (996). A comparative study of declared and undeclared college students on career uncertainty and involvement in career development activities. Journal of Counseling and Development, 74, Pavesic, D. V., & Brymer, R. A. (989). Industry retention/attrition of hospitality graduates. Hospitality Education and Research Journal, 3(3), Raybould, M., & Wilkins, H. (2005). Over qualified and under experienced. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 7(3), Riggenbach, A. (2008). Major decisions. Kent State Magazine, 7(4), 8-9. Self, J. T. (2005) Hindsight: A qualitative analysis of hospitality graduates. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education, 7(), Smith, S. M. (200). A social cognitive approach to the career development of undergraduate students. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 43(4), Super, D. E. (957). The Psychology of Careers. New York: Harper and Row. Super, D. E. (963). Vocational development in adolescence and early adulthood: Tasks and behaviors. In D. E. Super, R. Starishevsky, N. Matlin, & J. P. Jordaan (Eds.), Career development: Self-concept theory. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Taylor, K. M., & Betz, N. E. (983). Applications of self-efficacy theory to the understanding and treatment of career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, About the Authors Ning-Kuang Chuang, PhD, is assistant professor in Hospitality Management Program. Kathleen Walker, PhD, is assistant professor in Human Development and Family Studies Program and Natalie Caine-Bish, PhD, is assistant professor in Nutrition and Dietetics Program. All three programs are in School of Family and Consumer Studies at Kent State University. 29