Career Adaptability in General Upper Secondary Education: The Role of SES,Gender,and Socioemotional Factors

Introduction

During the upper secondary education, adolescents assess different career options, reflect on their personal strengths and aspirations, and reevaluate their vocational decisions based on their abilities, challenges, and future goals (Oliveira et al., 2023; Savickas & Savickas, 2017). According to career construction theory (CCT; Savickas, 2002, 2020; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), career adaptability is a key conceptualization in the relational and socially constructed capabilities and competencies that individuals use to cope with both educational and occupational transitions and tasks. However, empirical research examining the development of career adaptability in the context of academically rigorous general upper secondary school—that is, the academic track in upper secondary education, which is typically attended by students aged 16 to 19 who are preparing for higher education—is scarce. In addition, prior studies relied on cross-sectional data (Hirschi et al., 2015; Šverko & Babarović, 2019), which leaves the progression of students’ career adaptability unclear. While such studies—primarily focused on the influence of personal factors—have produced valuable findings, societal variables have been largely neglected in this stream of research (Magnano et al., 2021; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). This is the case despite evidence indicating that individuals’ horizons and responses to transitions and tasks vary depending on their backgrounds, available resources, and potential barriers, which some sociologically oriented studies have emphasized (Blustein et al., 2002; Eshelman & Rottinghaus, 2015; Heiskala et al., 2023; Schellenberg et al., 2022). Moreover, within the framework CCT (Savickas, 2002, 2020), the specific roles of socioemotional difficulties and strengths as traits influencing career adaptability remain insufficiently understood when considering these personal factors as indicators of adaptive readiness. For instance, socioemotional strengths may contribute to strengthening the core dimensions of career adaptability through fostering interpersonal skills, building social capital, and promoting a sense of purpose (Oliveira et al., 2023; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). Therefore, drawing on the above-mentioned foundation and the meta-analysis done by Rudolph et al. (2017), this longitudinal study examines two categories of variables: (1) personal factors, including prosocial behavior and emotional difficulties, and (2) societal factors, such as gender, perceived income, parents’ educational background, and school’s geographical location. This approach enables us to examine not only the development of different dimensions of career adaptability but also how the chosen variables predict such development in the context of Finnish students’ three-year general upper secondary education.

Career Adaptability and Career Construction: Theoretical Perspectives

Within the framework of CCT (Hirschi et al., 2015; Rudolph et al., 2017; Savickas, 2020; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), career adaptability refers to an individual’s self-regulation resources and capacity to cope with both current and anticipated career-related tasks, transitions, and challenges (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). According to the CCT model of adaptation, individuals vary in terms of their readiness to adapt (adaptivity or adaptive readiness) and capacity to adapt (adaptability resources or career adaptability), which shape how they respond to changing circumstances (adapting responses) and navigate work- and education-related transitions (adaptation results) (Rudolph et al., 2017; Savickas, 2020). In this model, personal factors (e.g., emotional difficulties and prosocial behavior) can be understood as indicators of adaptive readiness (adaptivity)—that is, traits influencing the extent to which individuals can develop and utilize their career adaptability resources.

Career adaptability resources are operationalized through four interrelated yet distinct variables—concern, control, curiosity, and confidence—so that they encompass the cognitive abilities individuals possess and use when preparing for career and educational transitions (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). According to CCT, career concern is the most important dimension of career adaptability. It relates to an individual’s outlook on the future, particularly their awareness of and readiness for the challenges and responsibilities associated with career development (Savickas, 2020). A lack of career concern can lead to difficulties in terms of career planning or indifference toward future opportunities. Career control is seen as an aspect of the intrapersonal processes that promote self-regulation and prompt individuals to engage in vocational development tasks and negotiate occupational transitions. Career control also reflects the degree to which individuals take ownership of and seek to actively shape their career paths. Students who exhibit strong career control perceive themselves to be responsible for their own future and demonstrate a proactive approach to decision-making as well as a clear understanding of their vocational choices (Hirschi, 2009; Savickas, 2020). A sense of self-control can inspire students to explore potential career paths and opportunities, which will likely lead to increased curiosity. Career curiosity refers to an individual’s willingness to explore different career options and envision possible future selves. An insufficient level of career curiosity may hinder an individual’s career planning, delay essential preparatory actions, and limit the development of realistic self-perception. Finally, career confidence represents an individual’s belief in their ability to navigate career-related challenges, achieve goals, and make informed decisions (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). As such, a lack of career confidence can lead to career stagnation and hamper both role fulfillment and goal achievement (Magnano et al., 2021; Rudolph et al., 2017; Savickas, 2020).

Empirical research has highlighted the distinctions between these four dimensions, revealing them to be associated with various career difficulties and suggesting they influence career decisions in different ways (Karacan-Ozdemir, 2019; Rudolph et al., 2017). Such psychological resources may develop at different rates, and individuals may rely more on some dimensions than on others, depending on their experience and stage of career development (Hartung & Cadaret, 2017; Hirschi et al., 2015). Therefore, in this study, we focus on career resources rather than on outcomes or adaptation results, which reflects the understanding that career-related decision-making is an ongoing process wherein career adaptability can fluctuate over time in response to both personal and environmental circumstances (Autin et al., 2017; Negru-Subtirica et al., 2015). This approach also reflects the notion that career adaptability represents a mechanism through which these personal and contextual resources are translated into concrete adaptation outcomes (Rudolph et al., 2017).

Research Questions

Based on prior, we formulated two research questions, as follows.

RQ1: How do the four dimensions of career adaptability (concern, control, curiosity, and confidence) develop over time during general upper secondary school, and to what extent do students differ in terms of their initial levels and growth trajectories?

Methods

Results

To answer the first research question, separate linear growth models were estimated for each career adaptability dimension, that is, career control, career curiosity, career confidence, and career concern. All four models had an excellent fit to the data (both CFI and TLI >.95 and RMSEA and SRMR >.05). The results (Table 1) showed that at the beginning of general upper secondary studies, there was significant variance in the latent level factors (intercept) in each model, which indicated that there were individual differences in the initial levels of the students’ career control, career curiosity, career confidence, and career concern. The development (slope factor means) for the dimensions of career concern, confidence, and curiosity were negative but not statistically significant. For the dimension of career control, the slope factor mean was positive but not statistically significant. These findings indicated that all the dimensions of career adaptability were, on average, relatively stable during the three-year general upper secondary education studies. However, there was statistically significant variance in the slopes of career curiosity, career confidence, and career concern, thereby indicating that even if the three dimensions were stable on average, there were still individual differences in the rate of change across time. For the dimension of career control, the variance for the slope factor was not statistically significant. Finally, the initial levels of all the dimensions of career adaptability were negatively and statistically significantly associated with the development of career adaptability, which implied that the higher the initial level of career adaptability in the first year, the less change there was during the three years of studies.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Associations Between the Latent Level and Slope Factors of Career Adaptability

CAAS dimension	Intercept meana	Intercept variance	Slope mean	Slope variance	Intercept and slope correlation
Concern	.000	.505***	−.032	.079**	−.148***
Control	.000	.574**	.029	.046	−.103*
Curiosity	.000	.352***	−.041	.053**	−.079**
Confidence	.000	.550***	−.004	.126***	−.192***

To answer the second research question, emotional difficulties, prosocial behavior, gender, and all SES variables, including caregivers’ educational background, self-reported family income, and the school’s geographical location, were added to the models as predictors of the initial levels for all of the dimensions of career adaptability and the development of career curiosity, career confidence, and career concern. All the predictors were allowed to correlate with each other. The model for career control (Figure 1) had an excellent fit to the data: χ² (70) = 106.916, CFI = .978, TLI = .969, RMSEA = .029, 90% CI [.017, .039], SRMR = .035. The results showed that perceived family income positively predicted the initial level of career control so that the higher the students perceived their family income, the higher the initial level of career control was. In turn, the schools’ geographical location negatively predicted career control such that students who attended school in rural areas had lower initial level of career control than students in urban areas. The other predictors did not predict the initial level of career control. Additionally, none of the predictors statistically significantly predicted the development of career curiosity.OPEN IN VIEWER

The model for career curiosity (Figure 2) had a good fit to the data: χ² (70) = 156.699, CFI = .942, TLI = .918, RMSEA = .044, 90% CI [.035, .053], SRMR = .048. The results revealed that gender and perceived family income positively predicted the initial level of career curiosity, thereby suggesting that males had a higher initial level of curiosity compared to females and that the higher the perceived family income, the higher were students’ initial level of curiosity. Furthermore, none of the predictors contributed to the development of career curiosity.OPEN IN VIEWER

The model for career concern (Figure 3) had an excellent fit to the data: χ² (69) = 83.545, CFI = .993, TLI = .990, RMSEA = .018, 90% CI [.000, .031], SRMR = .037. The results showed that gender positively and schools’ geographical location negatively predicted the initial level of career concern. Males had a higher initial level of concern than females, and students who attended general upper secondary school in rural environments had lower initial levels of career concern than students in urban areas. Additionally, gender and emotional difficulties both negatively predicted the slope of career concern. Although female students had a lower initial level of career concern, their concern increased more than that of the male students. In addition, the more emotional difficulties students reported, the less their career concern increased.OPEN IN VIEWER

The final model for career confidence (Figure 4) had an excellent fit to the data: χ2 (70) = 83.073, CFI = .992, TLI = .989, RMSEA = .017, 90% CI [.000, .030], SRMR = .033. The results showed that gender positively and schools’ geographical locations negatively predicted the initial level of career confidence: males and urban students reported higher levels of career confidence. In addition, gender also negatively predicted the development of career confidence such that although the males’ initial level of career confidence was higher, their confidence increased less than the female students’.OPEN IN VIEWER

Discussion

Guided by the CCT theoretical framework (Savickas, 2002; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), this study examined how the four dimensions of career adaptability (control, curiosity, confidence and concern) developed over time in academically demanding, general upper secondary education and to what extent students differed in terms of their initial levels and development of these dimensions. We were also interested in identifying how SES, gender, and socioemotional difficulties and strengths as independent predicters predicted initial levels and the development of the different career adaptability dimensions.

First, our findings showed that there were significant inter-individual differences in students’ levels of career adaptability in all the dimensions. This suggests that students enter into general upper secondary education with varying levels of career-related resources, reflecting differences in developmental pace and reliance on specific dimensions shaped by prior experiences and career stage (Hartung & Cadaret, 2017; Hirschi et al., 2015). This result also emphasized the critical role of career guidance in academically demanding general upper secondary education. Given that students are expected to make key educational decisions relatively early, the observed variability in the dimensions of career adaptability underscored the need to identify students who may lack essential psychosocial resources, as has also been stated by other scholars, such as Jemini-Gashi et al. (2019) and Whiston et al. (2017).

Second, our study identified several predictors that explained the differences in the students’ career adaptability levels. Notably, gender was a significant factor predicting initial levels of career curiosity, concern, and confidence. Specifically, males scored higher than females across all these dimensions, consistent with previous research reporting higher levels of career adaptability among male students. (Hirschi, 2009; Nikander et al., 2022). However, our results also contradicted the prevailing pattern in the literature, where many studies reported the opposite finding—that females had reported higher career adaptability than males (Creed et al., 2010; Negru-Subtirica et al., 2015). These contradictory results suggest that gender differences in career adaptability are complex and may vary depending on cultural, developmental and educational contexts, as suggested in CCT (Savickas, 2002). Several factors may explain the higher levels of career adaptability among males in our study. Prior research suggest that males often report higher self-esteem and a stronger sense of agency than females (Orth et al., 2012), which may contribute to a greater perceived ability to shape their career paths. Conversely, social expectations for females to establish plans early may constrain perceived flexibility, expectations, and confidence regarding career choices (Gibson & Lawrence, 2010) leading to lower self-assessed levels of career curiosity, concern, and confidence. On the other hand, no gender differences were observed in the career control dimension, which suggested that both genders are equally engaged in career-related activities and show a willingness to reflect on their future career choices in academically demanding general upper secondary education.

Our study also demonstrated that the geographical location of the schools significantly predicted students’ initial levels of career control, concern, and confidence. Specifically, students enrolled in rural schools reported lower initial levels in these dimensions compared to their peers in urban environments. These findings support and extend the work of Armila et al. (2018), Alexander (2025), and Bakke and Hooley (2022), who showed that young people in sparsely populated regions often face narrower horizons for career decision-making and are more frequently required to make compromises in their educational and vocational paths. Youth in rural areas perceive limited opportunities and lower confidence, whereas urban environments provide a greater sense of possibilities in career choice. Such disparities may also be partially explained by similar findings from Hou and Liu (2021), who emphasized the role of family socioeconomic status and access to capital resources in shaping students’ career adaptability differences. Consistent with this finding, our study found that perceived family income also was a significant predictor of students’ initial levels of career control and curiosity. When students perceived that their family income was low, it predicted lower initial levels of control and curiosity. This result aligns with previous research (Adler et al., 2000; Autin et al., 2017; Blustein et al., 2002), which demonstrated that subjective social status—one’s perception of their socioeconomic position—can influence key psychological processes, such as perceived control, optimism, and coping strategies, as much as objective indicators of social standing. These psychological factors as stated in CCT, in turn, have a profound impact on the career perspectives of young people (Adler et al., 2000).

Examining the development of career adaptability and the factors that predict this development our findings indicated that all dimensions of career adaptability remained relatively stable over the three-year period of general upper secondary education. However, statistically significant differences between students were observed in the development of three specific dimensions: curiosity, confidence, and concern. While these dimensions were stable on average, individual differences emerged. As CCT suggest, career adaptability evolves and strengthens with age, education and experience, as individuals encounter a variety of career-related decisions and choices shaped by contextual influences (Babarović & Šverko, 2016; Savickas, 2020). Consequently, it can be argued that some students may benefit more than others from the guidance practices and content provided in general upper secondary education. As Savickas (2020) noted, such development can be supported by targeted interventions to enhance individuals’ overall career adaptability—a claim substantiated by prior research demonstrating the effectiveness of such interventions (Jemini-Gashi et al., 2019; Whiston et al., 2017). Our findings also showed that career control remained relatively stable during upper secondary education. This stability may suggest that students’ decision-making abilities and their sense of control over future career-related choices undergo limited development. Although schools are recognized as critical environments for shaping students’ occupational identities (Verhoeven et al., 2019), these findings suggest that, in the context of general upper secondary education, some students may not develop a clear understanding of their vocational options—particularly in terms of control. This is noteworthy because career control is considered a key aspect of successful transition from education to work (Savickas, 2020).

Our findings concerning the predictors of career adaptability development revealed that gender significantly predicted the development of career concern and confidence, with females exhibiting greater increases than males. Notably, although female students began general upper secondary school with lower initial levels of concern and confidence, they demonstrated more substantial developmental gains in these dimensions over time. This aligns with research showing consistently that girls tend to exhibit higher future orientation, academic motivation, and a sense of responsibility during adolescence than boys (Gibson & Lawrence, 2010; Käyhkö, 2011) therefore fostering the development of future-oriented adaptabilities, such as career concern and confidence. Specifically, career concern refers to the degree to which individuals anticipate and prepare for their future roles, while career confidence denotes their perceived ability to cope with challenges and make decisions (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). Moreover, females may receive more encouragement and reinforcement for planning and help-seeking behaviors (Gibson & Lawrence, 2010)—factors that are positively associated with the development of these adaptability dimensions. It has been suggested that school counselling practices tend to align with communicative and reflective learning styles which are more common among female students, resulting more support to females than males in terms of career planning (Watson & McMahon, 2005).

This study also found that emotional difficulties (e.g., anxiety and depressive symptoms) predicted the development of career concern such that the more students reported these difficulties, the less their career concern increased. In line with CCT model of adaptation, it can be suggested that emotional difficulties, as indicators of adaptative readiness, may interfere with the forward-looking readiness associated with career development (Savickas, 2020). Career concern, defined as the extent to which individuals are oriented toward and engaged with their future careers (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), requires a degree of psychological stability and future orientation. Emotional difficulties may impair these capacities by narrowing the horizon, reducing individuals’ ability to plan ahead or imagine positive future outcomes (Savickas, 2020; Schellenberg et al., 2022). In this light, emotional well-being can be seen as a foundational resource for adaptive career development as also suggested Rudolph et al. (2017).

Conclusion

Our research shows that there are individual differences in career adaptability among students at the outset of upper secondary education, nor does it develop uniformly. Our findings reveal that in line with CCT, both personal and societal factors distinctly shape not only the initial levels of career adaptability dimensions (concern, control, curiosity, confidence), but also their developmental patterns throughout schooling. Importantly, our findings underscore a broader social-justice issue and draw attention to often-overlooked social factors in guidance—issues that critics such as Blustein et al. (2002) and Hooley et al. (2018) have emphasized. The results reinforce arguments in the literature that social inequalities must be explicitly acknowledged in career guidance practices. Also, while some approaches, such as CCT (Savickas, 2002), are acknowledged as shaped within social contexts, they remain insufficient to address the impact of power relations and social structures on individual agency (McCrory, 2022).

As our data demonstrate, the students’ perceptions of limited financial resources, gender, emotional difficulties, and the geographical location of school were significant factors that have already influenced—and continue to shape—the development of career adaptability in general upper secondary education. As these predictive factors largely relate to initial levels of career adaptability, it suggest that students’ starting points appear predetermined, and existing guidance systems are insufficient to narrow these gaps. These findings provide an empirical basis for developing career guidance in academically demanding school environments, stating the need for more inclusive, equity-driven guidance and targeted counseling interventions. Such support not only facilitates smoother transitions and promotes educational equity (Hooley et al., 2018; Niemi & Laaksonen, 2020) but also enhances aspects of career adaptability, thereby ultimately empowering students to navigate their future career paths more effectively (Jemini-Gashi et al., 2019; Whiston et al., 2017).

Supplemental Material