Abstract
In this article, we discuss the integration of prevention science and vocational psychology for person- and system-focused prevention with a critical social justice agenda. More specifically, we focus on career development education as a potentially transformative primary prevention activity for increasing youth access to decent work and lives of well-being. We consider this as a critical agenda for two reasons. First, there are continued declines in the availability of decent work on a global level. In addition, youth who are marginalized by society are particularly vulnerable in competing for access to such dwindling opportunities and in thriving in communities and workplaces characterized by oppressive policies and practices. Building upon previous work in prevention and vocational psychology from a social justice perspective, we suggest that the psychology of working theory (PWT) can serve as a conceptual framework for developing and evaluating person- and system-focused preventive interventions that will address marginalization and seek to prepare all youth for an uncertain and shifting work future.
Over the past several decades, the United States has experienced vast and sweeping changes that undermine the sense of predictability and continuity that provide a basis for future planning and psychological well-being (Porter & Yaffe-Bellany, 2020). The global coronavirus pandemic offers a profound and unprecedented demonstration of the precarity of our health, economic, and educational systems. While the 2020 crisis is hopefully an exceptional event, it follows other crises of the 21st century, including the Great Recession of 2007–2008 and the World Trade Tower Bombings of 2001. These events have arguably had profound psychological, social, and economic impacts on current generations, especially young people, as other critical events have had in shaping past generations.
For prevention science and practice, such events raise questions not only as to how such traumatic events might have been averted or mitigated, but also as to how individuals and groups can be better prepared to navigate such challenges to sustain well-being and move forward with lives of meaning and purpose. Following a social justice approach (Kenny & Hage, 2009) and the Guidelines for Prevention in Psychology (American Psychological Association, 2014), prevention efforts need to be directed at both the systemic and person levels. That is, while prevention scientists need to engage in social change efforts that seek to eliminate the policies and structures that undermine well-being, prevention is optimally also focused on strengthening the psychological and social resources that allow persons and groups to cope more adaptively with negative life events and stressors (Albee, 1986). The vast and oftentimes traumatic events mentioned above demand a broad approach to building complex and multifaceted health-promoting structures on a global level with collaboration across multiple disciplines. Specific person-centered prevention initiatives are also warranted, especially for those most vulnerable to the negative impact of social and economic disruption. At a time when the world is changing so rapidly, the preventionist needs to be knowledgeable about multisystemic factors and equipped to foster intervention at multiple levels.
This article presents a rationale and framework for youth-focused prevention and health promotion at the nexus of vocational psychology and prevention science. We begin with a consideration of the changes in the world of work that threaten well-being and create an urgency for youth-focused prevention and health promotion that addresses these threats. We discuss career development education (CDE) as one form of universal prevention that can be developed and delivered by preventionists in drawing upon the knowledge bases of vocational and critical psychology and positive youth development. The psychology of working theory (PWT; Blustein, 2006; Duffy et al., 2016) will be presented as a theoretical lens, consistent with a social justice approach to prevention (Albee, 1986; Kenny & Hage, 2009; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002) that can be used to guide CDE at both the person and system levels (Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019). We discuss the application of PWT for interventions that address the challenges that youth face in accessing and thriving in decent work and provide some examples of intervention from our work and that of other colleagues.
Changes in the World of Work and Threats to Well-Being
While unemployment and underemployment are long-standing problems, profound changes in the workplace associated with technology, globalization, and the aftermath of the 2007–2008 recession contributed to what many envision as an impending crisis (Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019; Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2015). The development of transformative technologies (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014) contributed to rises in underemployment, along with engagement in low-wage, contract, temporary, and precarious work for a larger segment of the population. According to the 2020 report of the International Labour Organization
Despite the above concerns, the United States and many industrialized nations reported high levels of employment and corporate profitability as of winter 2020 and were believed by many to have largely recovered from the 2007–2008 recession (Hoffman, 2020). That changed abruptly, however, with the outbreak of COVID-19 on a global level. As we have witnessed across previous crises, those who have had been systematically excluded from social and economic opportunities prior to the crisis have been most vulnerable to further loss in the context of the pandemic (Couch et al., 2020). Highest rates of unemployment and illness have been experienced among minoritized communities where underlying health conditions, compact living arrangements, and employment as essential workers with exposure to risks for infection are prevalent (Kantamneni, 2020; Miceli, 2020).
Evidence suggests furthermore that low-income and first-generation minoritized college students are also most at risk for not returning to and completing college in the context of this pandemic (Fain, 2020). Individuals and communities that lack a financial safety net may need to forego their hopes for actualizing relational and self-determination needs in their lives and focus on meeting survival needs. While families and communities living in poverty often manifest numerous strengths and sources of resilience (Masten, 2001; Vera & Shin, 2006), they are less likely to be connected to the types of social networks and social capital that enable more affluent youth to navigate these challenges and thrive in school and career (Fisher, 2018). In the immediacy of the current crisis, recognition of the widespread challenges confronting society has contributed to the expression of compassion and some public funding to assist people during the crisis. While the distribution of emerging funds has reflected societal inequities, public compassion may be short-lived, with the likelihood that marginalized communities will be blamed for their educational, economic, and career shortcomings if unable to rebound from the effects of the crisis (Chen & Sharone, 2020). As noted by Fouad (2020), the full impact of COVID-19 on work and workers is not fully known, but will demand innovative and transformative research and intervention from the field of vocational psychology.
Prevention and Vocational Psychology
While prevention and vocational psychology are long-standing yet distinct subspecialties in the field of counseling psychology, we maintain that the knowledge bases of these specialties can be integrated to address some of the challenges youth face in relation to social and economic change and inequity. Vocational psychology, as a specialization in psychology, includes “a diverse group of researchers and career practitioners who are committed to the common vision of helping individuals with work related issues across the life span in a volatile global economy” (https://www.div17svp.org/). Vocational intervention is a broad term that encompasses many efforts, such as individual career counseling and guidance, groups, workshops, classes, and computer-assisted interventions, intended to foster the career development of persons or enable them to make better career decisions and manage work transitions (Whiston et al., 2017). In this chapter, we adopt a broad definition of vocational psychology and view the practice of vocational psychology and career development and guidance interchangeably, while also acknowledging that they have origins in different specializations (counseling, counseling psychology, and applied psychology; Blustein, Ali, et al., 2019). We encourage all vocational researchers and career practitioners across the fields of school counseling, counseling/vocational psychology, career guidance, career coaching, and rehabilitation counseling to consider ways to enhance the preventive dimensions of their work (Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019).
A number of theoretical and research developments highlight links between prevention and vocational psychology and document the importance of vocational development for well-being across the life span. Among adults, for example, the relationship between work and well-being is well documented (Blustein, 2008; Paul & Moser, 2009). Although research shows that loss of work in situations of unemployment poses threats to well-being, the quality of the work experience also matters. More specifically, the conditions of decent work, a concept defined by the ILO (2008) and operationalized by Duffy and colleagues (2016, 2017) as work that offers physically and interpersonally safe working conditions, adequate compensation, opportunities for leisure, access to health care and values that complement family and social values, have been associated with work satisfaction and work meaning among workers across varied sectors of the globe (Duffy et al., 2020). The benefits of decent work are derived from its capacity for satisfying human needs for economic survival, connection, and self-determination (Blustein, 2006), with risks to the psychological and social well-being of individuals, families, and communities escalating when access to decent work declines. Research reveals that when the conditions that characterize decent work are lacking, work satisfaction drops and individuals are more likely to express the intention of leaving their work (Duffy et al., 2020). This is consistent with the vast body of research documenting the ways in which toxic conditions and climate in the workplace, including discrimination, harassment, stereotyping and stigma related to race, disability, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and other forms of oppression, contribute to worker stress, decisions to leave the workplace, and declines in physical and mental health (Flores, 2013; McGillen et al., 2020). The risks posed by the global pandemic are also calling into question the practices and conditions that are needed to protect employee physical health and psychological well-being in the workplace and when working from home (Kantamneni, 2020). In acknowledgment of the deep and complex relationships between work, relationships, and well-being, personal and vocational intervention are often viewed as interrelated processes.
Although vocational intervention has not traditionally been considered prevention, it is clearly aligned with primary prevention (Di Fabio et al., 2017). Indeed, for young people who have not yet entered the workforce, developing the skills and competencies that will contribute to their well-being across the life span is an important wellness promotion endeavor. Research has shown, for example, that young people who have a clear sense of their vocational futures are more likely to be engaged in and understand the value of school (Kenny et al., 2006, 2010). Persons with higher levels of educational attainment are also more likely to experience physical and psychological well-being across the life span (Case & Deaton, 2020; Kenny & Walsh-Blair, 2012). While in recent years considerable attention has focused on equipping young people with the academic and technical skills required by the 21st-century marketplace, we advocate for a whole-person perspective that highlights the interrelationship of developmental competencies across varied life domains (academic, social, vocational, and psychological) and across varied life contexts (family, school, workplace, community, and beyond). In this regard, we build on the efforts of other vocational scholars. Lent and Brown (2013), for example, recognize career intervention as prevention and describe how social cognitive career theory (SCCT, Lent & Brown, 2013) can be integrated with multicultural psychology in the design of interventions that promote vocational hope and school performance and prevent school drop-out. McWhirter et al. (2019) provide additional examples of the integration of SCCT, multicultural psychology, and critical psychology in youth-focused career intervention. Di Fabio et al. (2017) describe how a range of psychological competencies drawn from career and self-construction theories (Savickas, 2013), SCCT (Lent & Brown, 2013), and psychology of working (Blustein, 2006) can be fostered to enable youth people to more effectively navigate normative career development tasks and cope with less predictable crises.
Career development education (CDE) includes a variety of school-based curriculum and out-of-school activities, including work-based learning (WBL), internships, and job shadowing (Kenny, 2013). As such, CDE represents a type of universal prevention that can be delivered through schools, as well as through after-school and summer programs. Although CDE programs have long been offered with positive effects (Whiston et al., 2017), the challenges to well-being that arise from sweeping changes in the structure of work and dramatic rises in economic inequality have created an urgency for implementing a transformative CDE. Transformative CDE should go beyond career exploration and planning to prepare young people to cope effectively with interrelated social, psychological, and work challenges and contribute to the well-being of themselves and others (Ali et al., 2012; Barnes, 2020). Educational preparation is not enough, with data revealing that the lifetime earnings of persons with a high school education who are not from low-income backgrounds exceed that of college graduates from low-income families (Bartik & Hershbein, 2016). Differences in annual earnings for individuals with the same degree also vary by race and gender, with people who are Black and Hispanic earning significantly less than people who are White and Asian in the United States (Fontenot et al., 2018). We maintain that career-based preventive interventions need to attend more deeply to what Blustein and Kenny (2020) refer to as the “in-between stuff” (p. 101) that limits persons’ capacities, beyond their academic, technical, and social skills, to access decent work and lives of purpose, satisfaction, and well-being. By “in-between stuff” we include the acquisition of knowledge, skills, and attitudes for coping effectively with interrelated social, psychological, and work challenges and for effectively navigating and resisting marginalization and oppression. In the U.S. context, such interventions need to be designed with specific attention to the experiences of students of color. In recognition of the vast challenges related to social and economic change and inequities that threaten well-being beyond the individual level, we maintain that such interventions need to go beyond individual-level intervention to also address system-level factors. In so doing, we embrace Albee’s (Albee & Ryan-Finn, 1993) notion that the incidence of physical and mental illness is a function of the environmental conditions that foster oppression and inequity, divided by the strengths of individuals and groups to resist the negative effects of oppression. Following this incidence formula (Albee & Ryan-Finn, 1993), effective prevention must thus seek to remove environmental sources of oppression and foster the personal competencies, coping skills, and social supports to effectively navigate, cope with, and resist the negative effects of oppression.
Applying the Psychology of Working Theory in Youth-Focused Prevention and Health Promotion
Although psychologists are not equipped to devise new economic strategies in response to economic and social crises, we can, consistent with Albee and Ryan-Finn’s (1993) incidence formula, develop and evaluate interventions designed to enhance individual capacities for navigating change and inequity, while also promoting systemic changes that facilitate broader access to decent work. While these are ambitious goals, PWT (Blustein, 2006; Duffy et al., 2016) offers a framework that is heuristic in guiding these efforts.
PWT evolved out of a recognition that work plays a vital role in fostering individual, family, and community well-being through the satisfaction of human needs for survival, relationship, and self-determination. Furthermore, the elaboration of the theory was driven by awareness that access to the varieties of work that are most likely to meet these needs is differentially available and often inaccessible to persons and groups impacted by social marginalization and economic constraints. Whereas the practice arm of vocational psychology has focused in recent decades on career choice and development issues that confront more privileged groups, the PWT movement sought to return to the social and political roots of vocational guidance in the early 20th century, typified by the efforts of Frank Parsons, to increase opportunities for persons who are working class and poor (Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019). In recognition that most vocational and career interventions have been designed for those privileged individuals who have a choice in selecting their work pathways and agency in their advancement along their career trajectories, PWT was designed as a framework that would guide both person-level and systemic interventions to enhance access to decent work for all persons who want to work. In this regard, PWT goes beyond the traditional focus of career intervention on individual career choice and development, adapting a change paradigm that seeks to reduce oppressive systems and structures (Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019; Prilleltensky & Stead, 2013).
At the person level, the PWT model seeks to explain how individuals can build psychological resources such as adaptability and work volition despite the presence of economic and social constraints, and thereby enhance their likelihood of accessing decent work, fulfilling needs for survival, relationship, and self-determination, and achieving well-being and life satisfaction. A significant body of research has been carried out that supports the model in explaining the relationship between access to decent work and well-being for varied samples of college students and working adults (see Duffy et al., 2019, for a summary). PWT (Duffy et al., 2016) also specifies a number of psychological resources that are hypothesized to moderate the negative effects of social marginalization and economic conditions on adaptability and work volition. These factors, which include social support, proactive personality, and critical consciousness, were identified through a review of existing research that documents their contributions to adaptive career development, career advancement, and well-being across varied populations (Duffy et al., 2019). While substantive research documents the value of these psychological resources, research has not yet examined their specific role in buffering the negative impact of marginalization and economic conditions for adaptability and work volition as hypothesized by PWT (Duffy et al., 2019).
While a growing body of research supports the PWT model, PWT informed interventions at the individual and system levels are also beginning to emerge in the literature. The practice implications of PWT largely focus on efforts to promote access to decent work, well-being, and life satisfaction by intervening to shape the mediator (adaptability and work volition) and the moderator (social support, proactive personality, and critical consciousness) variables. With a focus on enhancing practice applications, Blustein, Kenny, et al. (2019) advanced PWT as a “theory of change for a new era” that could be applied to shape and align career and educational services and practices with a social justice agenda across high schools, higher education, workplace, and policy settings. At both the person and system level, change is initiated through a process of agentic action, or efforts to pursue one’s aims in the context of life circumstances (Richardson, 2012). The theory of change specifies three sources for agentic action—critical reflection and action, proactive engagement, and social support—that are aligned with the PWT predictor and moderator variables. Critical reflection and action refer to the capacity to understand the contributions of systemic factors to one’s psychosocial experiences and the broader conditions in one’s life, and to act in an intentional manner in response to this knowledge. Proactive engagement entails the motivation and initiative that propels social action, with social support and community engagement highlighting the roles of relational support, collaboration, and community organizing in carrying out transformative change (Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019).
Blustein, Kenny, et al. (2019) designate psychology of working counseling (PWC) as the application of these sources of agentic action to person-level intervention, and psychology of working system intervention (PWSI) to application at the systems level. As described below, these sources of agentic action can be developed and applied in prevention initiatives at the person and systems level. Table 1 provides examples of each source of social action at the person and systems level. Below we described the three sources of agentic action, their research base, and how each may be applied in person- and system-focused prevention for promoting youth access to decent work and well-being. In so doing, we focus on challenges in the changing world of work with attention to the precarity of work as related to technological change, globalization, the current pandemic, racism, and inequality.
Sources of Agentic Action in Person- and System-Focused Prevention.
Note. This table is adapted from Blustein, Kenny, et al., 2019.
Psychology of Working Prevention: Person-Focused Career Development Education
To date, most of the person-centered applications of PWT have included interventions for adults and college students engaged in career decision making, career change, or seeking re-entry into the job market following periods of unemployment. Here, we extend the applications of PWT to prevention and wellness promotion through person-focused career development education. Following the PWT framework, preventively oriented career development education may seek to foster the three sources of agentic action: critical reflection and action, proactive engagement, and social support by incorporating activities designed to promote these propensities (Kenny, Blustein, et al., 2019). As we describe below, we believe that PWT is a compelling framework for guiding prevention-oriented CDE. The three sources of agentic action can be helpful as youth try to navigate the personal, family, school, and career planning challenges associated with long-standing inequities in access to decent work and the heightened challenges associated with the current pandemic. While these three sources of agentic action do not address all of challenges youth are experiencing, they represent some of the “in-between stuff” (p. 101) that has traditionally been ignored in career development education, but is vital for young people seeking to attain lives of purpose and well-being in a context of rapid change, racism, and inequality (Blustein & Kenny, 2020). The value of these factors is derived by research drawn from critical psychology (Ali et al., 2012; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002; Prilleltensky & Stead, 2013) and career construction theory (Savickas, 2013), as well as the growing body of research validating the PWT model. We will briefly describe each of these factors.
Critical reflection and action
Critical reflection and action are aligned with the promotion of critical consciousness (CC) and reflect the interest in building skills through CDE for navigating the negative effects of marginalization, inequality, and harsh economic conditions. Fostering youth CC is intended to empower marginalized groups and also enhance awareness and social conscience among more privileged groups, with a focus on understanding the systemic bases of inequality. In the context of work scarcity, economic inequality, and systemic racism, all young people need to understand the structural barriers that limit access to decent work so that they can work to dismantle the structures that sustain social, racial/ethnic, and economic marginalization. Current conceptualizations of CC draw from Paulo Freire’s (1970) education liberation movement among illiterate Brazilian peasants. Freire maintained that by developing an understanding of the political, social, and economic factors that are responsible for pervasive poverty, racism, unemployment, and other forms of social exclusion, people can become less constrained by these conditions and gain a sense of agency to take action against oppressive forces (Diemer et al., 2016). In the current context, CC can play an important role in directing attention to the systemic causes for unemployment as opposed to blaming individuals and in maintaining focus on these issues as the more privileged recover from the economic crisis.
In recent years, research on youth career development and well-being has documented positive associations between CC and a more developed sense of vocational identity, commitment to future careers, work salience, vocational outcome expectations, intentions to enroll in further education, and belief in work as a larger part of one’s future life (Diemer & Blustein, 2006; Heberle et al., 2020; McWhirter & McWhirter, 2016) among youth of color in U.S. urban high schools. From a broader wellness promotion perspective, higher levels of CC have also been associated with greater civic participation (Diemer & Li, 2011) and better mental health (Zimmerman et al., 1999) among high school students of color. Despite this encouraging data, the integration of CC into vocational intervention is limited to date (see Kenny, Blustein, et al., 2019; McWhirter et al., 2019; Perry et al., 2014, for exceptions). In addition, recent research also offers some caveats about how CC may be both beneficial and challenging for young people based on developmental level and other factors (Heberle et al., 2020). Despite research suggesting that CC may have the potential to assist marginalized youth in negotiating structural barriers and social identity threats (Heberle et al., 2020), other studies have found that, for students who are of young age or of particular ethnicity or immigration backgrounds, the development of CC is intertwined with beliefs that justify the merits of the existing social and economic systems (Godfrey et al., 2019). These nuanced findings need further research and consideration in intervention planning.
Although rigorous research on methods for developing CC is limited (Montero, 2009), the literature (Diemer et al., 2016; Watts & Hipolito-Delgado, 2015) highlights principles and practices, such as the use of active listening, dialog, open communication, reflection, respect, and a concern for human rights, that are consistent with prevention practice. Group dialog, for example, is an important CC practice for bringing multiple voices into the conversation and in building a sense of solidarity and group affirmation that provides a foundation for personal and social action and change (Montero, 2009; Watts & Hipolito-Delgado, 2015). Additional strategies, such as photovoice, which uses photographs and story-telling as a basis for creating shared understanding, promoting critical reflection, and inspiring action planning (Carlson et al., 2006), have also been used successfully to promote CC among young people in school and community settings and can be creatively integrated in career education and youth prevention/promotion interventions.
Proactive engagement
Proactive engagement refers to the role of agency in anticipating, navigating, and responding to environmental challenges. While agency has traditionally had a role in a variety of mental health and career development interventions, PWT focuses, aligned with Richardson’ notion of agentic action, to foster a sense of agency with an awareness of navigating environmental constraints. With specific reference to the PWT framework, proactive engagement is aligned with the constructs of work volition, career adaptability, and proactive personality. Work volition, for example, refers to one’s capacities to implement choice in one’s life despite constraints, with career adaptability referring to the capacity to explore one’s options and to plan ahead for the future despite a context of uncertainty. Proactive personality reflects a disposition to take action and master challenges, which, despite its dispositional nature, can be cultivated through intervention (Roberts et al., 2017). PWT thus acknowledges, as articulated through career construction theory (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), that individuals need to develop the capacity for proactivity, adaptability, and a sense of work choice or volition in the context of a changing and unstable world of work. With regard to PWT, this concern is integrated with a primary awareness of structural constraints and attention to personal experiences of marginalization and the value of community and support in effecting personal and community change.
A robust body of research has documented relationships between work volition, career adaptability, proactive personality, and a variety of indices of career development and well-being (Autin et al., 2017; Duffy et al., 2015). Work volition and career adaptability are also desired and observable outcomes of career interventions (Duffy et al., 2016). Research suggests that work-based learning programs can serve to foster students’ sense of agency in navigating the pathway from high school to higher education or employment (Bempechat et al., 2014; Kenny et al., 2015). The three sources of agentic action work synergistically as CC seeks to enable those who have been marginalized to attain the individual and collective means for agency despite the experience of oppression.
Social support
The inclusion of social support in the PWT model and intervention is derived from an extensive body of research documenting the contributions of varied types (e.g., emotional, instrumental) and sources of social support (e.g., family, friends, teachers, mentors) for positive social, psychological, academic, and vocational outcomes across the life span. At the high school level, research with low income, ethnically diverse, urban and rural youth across the United States, for example, reveals positive associations between support from teachers, nuclear and extended family, peers, and other adult mentors and positive academic outcomes and indices of youth career progress (Ali et al., 2005; Kenny et al., 2003). With regard to broader indices of well-being, caring, supportive, and growth-fostering relationships with friends, family, and adult mentor figures are associated with the development of positive youth outcomes such as purpose, prosociality, and self-esteem (Liang et al., 2013; Scales et al., 2011). In addition to support, recent literature (Fisher, 2018; McGillen et al., 2020; Stanton-Salazar, 2011) highlights the importance of social capital and professional networks for career access and advancement. While youth with greater privilege develop social capital and professional networks through their family experiences, access to these resources needs to be explicitly cultivated for young people who have been marginalized and excluded from these resources (Hoffman & Collins, 2020). Those young people who lack a financial support system and extensive networks may be left behind as their more privileged peers secure paid and unpaid internships and employment. Despite the unequal playing field, researchers have found that career interventions offered for adolescents through schools and community agencies can enhance social support and build social networks that have economic value into adulthood (Mann et al., 2018).
The three sources of agentic action can be seamlessly integrated throughout person-focused CDE. Kenny and colleagues (Kenny, Blustein, et al., 2019; Kenny, Liang, et al., 2019) offer examples of PWT informed CDE programs that integrate work-based learning experiences with workshops intended to promote CC, sense of agency, purpose development, and social capital in a context of supportive adult relationships. Kozan et al. (2017) describe how CC can be cultivated through career development and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs with the intention of fostering student interest in studying STEM subjects and pursuing STEM careers. Patel (2013) demonstrates how critical reflection can be fostered by adult mentors who support immigrant youth in reflections on identifying and navigating issues of power and status in internships settings, along with a focus on the development of personal and workplace skills. We are collaborating with Big Picture Learning (www.bigpicture.org), a network of 100 innovative schools worldwide that emphasize student-centered learning and assessment, including student engagement in community-based internships and mentoring relationships. As part of this research–practice partnership, we are studying how teachers/advisors and internship coordinators in the school setting and mentors at internship sites promote the three sources of agentic action among high school students through their daily learning experiences. We are particularly attentive at this time to how advisors and mentors are supporting students academically, vocationally, socially, and personally in the context of the COVID-19 crisis. While the above examples suggest ways in which the three critical sources of agency can be integrated in prevention-oriented CDE, considerable work remains to be done in the development, implementation, and evaluation of such programs across varied settings. Sound empirical research will be needed to assess their efficacy, with attention to their value for low-income students and students of color.
Psychology of Working Prevention: System Focus
Consistent with a social justice approach to prevention (Albee, 1986; Kenny & Hage, 2009), we also recognize the need to go beyond work with individuals to address the systemic forces that contribute to marginalization and limit access to decent work. In general, preventive interventions require attention to systemic factors, in ways that are not essential for individual therapeutic interventions (Kenny & Medvide, 2012). A growing number of vocational scholars are also recognizing the need for systemic intervention (Blustein, Ali, & Flores, 2019; Hooley et al., 2017; McGillen et al., 2020) to effectively eradicate social injustice. Strategies to address systemic factors can entail social justice education, community outreach, social justice advocacy, community organization, and social action focused on microsystem change at the school, university, community, or workplace level or toward macro-level systemic change focused on public policies or governmental systems. A system focus is vital in that (a) preventionists need to understand the complexity of systemic factors in their clients’ lives and integrate this understanding in person and system change efforts; (b) interventions need to be designed with attention to the role of systems in impacting intervention processes and outcomes; and (c) preventionists need to join with other professionals and communities to share knowledge and best practices that impact well-being at multiple levels. Beyond this attention to systemic issues in the design and delivery of preventive interventions, (d) preventionists and other professionals need to join with communities in advocating for and implementing systemic change that reduces oppressions and is integral to equity in entry, retention, and advancement in decent work. Decent work, by definition, must be interpersonally and physically safe, free from bullying, harassment, and other forms of abuse, marginalization, and discrimination.
In our efforts in developing and evaluating preventively oriented career development education, we have been acutely aware of the range of systemic issues at the school, community, workplace, and broader societal levels that impact the feasibility and success of such programs, especially work-based learning. Beyond individual level efforts in delivering services to the students, a myriad of systemic factors need to be considered to attain desired student outcomes in the short term, to sustain those outcomes as a catalyst for longer term benefits, and to build capacity and sustainability of the intervention over the long term in schools, communities, work organization, and in public policy. Ali et al. (2012) note, for example, the array of contextual factors that impact the effectiveness and sustainability of vocational interventions in school and community settings. More specifically, at the microsystem level, collaborations with family members, teachers, counselors, workplace mentors, and community employers are important for creating the type of relational environment that fosters and supports the development of equity and agency for all youth. In order that youth can move effectively beyond their family, school, and workplace settings, broader systemic changes are needed that enhance higher education and the availability of decent work opportunities for all who want to work. Systemic change efforts are also needed to reduce discrimination and make schools, workplaces, and communities more inclusive so that young people can engage and thrive in these settings.
As described by Blustein, Kenny, et al. (2019), a needs assessment serves a foundational role in PWT change efforts as a process for identifying the individual and systemic factors that are contributing overtly and covertly to the social and racial marginalization and economic constraints that inhibit access to decent work and well-being. As with person level efforts, critical reflection and action, proactive engagement, and social support/community engagement remain vital tools or sources of agentic action for social transformation. CC offers a lens for identifying the structures, policies, and practices that become the target for proactive engagement and community engagement.
Critical reflection and action
With regard to critical reflection and action, system level intervention highlights the need for critical awareness among adults in community organizations, educational institutions, employment settings, and government agencies who can take an active role in altering those systemic factors that maintain the status quo. Here we speak to the importance for adults to educate one another through participation in group seminars, lectures or reading and reflection to foster critical awareness. As noted by Freire (1970), those who hold privilege and power in society must examine and modify their own roles in sustaining inequities for social justice to be advanced. Research has documented positive efforts in enhancing the critical reflection of professionals in education, educational leadership, psychology, social work, and the health professions (Halman et al., 2017; Nicotera & Kang, 2009; Zion et al., 2015). We also emphasize the need to enhance critical reflection and action outside of educational institutions, such as through corporations and human resources departments, that offer work-based learning and employment to youth and the adults in their lives. Through social justice education and consultation, efforts may be directed toward managers, fellow employees, and others in positions of power to enhance cultural competence, foster effective diversity policies, reduce oppressive attitudes and behaviors and create an inclusive and growth promoting organization for youth and other workers (McGillen et al., 2020). Stereotyping, stigma, discrimination, and harassment often shape the workplace climate with individuals from marginalized racial-ethnic groups being underrepresented in positions of leadership (McGillen et al., 2020).
Generation Work represents an initiative of the Annie E. Casey Foundation that seeks to expand the connection of young adults with meaningful work by integrating racial equity with Positive Youth Development (PYD) in workforce employment settings (The Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2018). In alignment with these efforts, the Foundation is striving to diversify their program staff across all levels and to build their capacity to better support young people of color in the workplace, including discussion of experiences of racism in the workplace. Technical assistance and research support is being offered by Child Trends, which is seeking to evaluate and share lessons learned from this work (Redd et al., 2020). Our efforts to develop equity-based CDE programs benefit from the knowledge being generated by these initiatives as documented by Child Trends.
Critical reflection and action serve as a vital foundation for proactive engagement by providing a means of understanding the nature of systemic forces within the various sectors that influence access to decent work and the attainment of social justice more broadly.
Proactive engagement
Proactive engagement entails the sense of purpose and initiative to take social action as a crucial component in moving toward transformative social change. The focus, initiative, and agency for social action are derived from the critical reflection and analysis. Through proactive engagement, vocational psychologists, preventionists, educators, and communities mobilize against oppressive systems in organizations and governmental systems through advocacy, outreach, and social action. Within organizations, leaders and other employees may challenge oppressive structures with a plan for reducing the levels of racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, and xenophobia that not only limit access to work, but create toxicity in the workplace and cause those who do not readily “fit in” to flee the workplace. Consultants external to the organizations can join with others within or outside of the organization in presenting the findings of a needs assessment and pressing for collaborative action (McGillen et al., 2020). Within work organizations, collaborations with industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists might also prove beneficial. Humanitarian work psychology (HWP; Carr et al., 2012; McWha-Hermann et al., 2015) focuses on the development of corporate social responsibility and the application of I-O psychology to address issues related to poverty, inequality, social justice, and decent work. HWP scholars argue that I-O research and practice, including job design, personnel recruitment and selection, reward and recognition systems, and the promotion of inclusion and prohibition of discrimination, can be applied to benefit and empower all workers.
Prevention scientists and practitioners who are involved in the design and evaluation of CDE programs can work with schools, community organizations, and policy institutes to design programs and policies that promote equity and access to decent work. Advocacy efforts can be directed toward organizations to increase programs and pathways that offer marginalized youth with access to entry and advancement in decent work. Scholars can conduct and disseminate research that serves to bring critical awareness to the public and policy makers with regard to issues of inequity and to the positive impacts of school and community-based programs that offer effective CDE and WBL for youth. Newspaper editorials, blogs, and radio presentations are some forums where prevention scholars can communicate relevant research and evaluation findings to reach a nonacademic audience. Presenting relevant research findings to legislative groups can also be effective in efforts to promote policy changes and support funding initiatives for equity-based CDE and WBL. Economic and health challenges related to the current pandemic also call for political advocacy to promote labor market policies that protect all vulnerable workers (Kantamneni, 2020).
Jobs for the Future (JFF; https://www.jff.org/) is a national nonprofit that offers a potent example of an organization working toward both person level and systemic change at the intersection of vocational psychology and prevention. The JFF policy team seeks to drive changes in the U.S. education system and workforce through advocacy to foster the economic advancement of all young people. While the JFF policy team promotes bold ideas to reconfigure systems of education and the workforce, the partnership team collaborates with companies to solve business challenges to benefit workers, communities, and the businesses. In recognition of the ways in which the COVID-19 crisis has magnified the economic inequalities in our society, JFF has amassed resources to assist educators, employers, and policy makers, posing a call to action for business, education, and government leaders to act in support of the most vulnerable individuals at present and to find long-term strategies to strengthen economic advancement for everyone to ensure a future that works.
Social support
Gaining community support and building collaborations are vital in developing the resources and supports needed for effective systemic change, particularly in confronting established systems of power. In moving beyond individual change efforts, the development of prevention-focused CDE relies on effective interprofessional and interdisciplinary collaborations to share knowledge, strategies, and collective power in advocating for change (Kenny et al., 2007; Tseng et al., 2017). We have, for example, partnered with a number of schools, community organizations, and health centers to design, deliver, and evaluate CDE and WBL programs, with the goal of using research and evaluation findings for program enhancement, identification of best processes and practices, creating community and governmental support, and advocacy for continued and expanded funding. We find these collaborations mutually beneficial as we learn from professionals and researchers across varied settings as we also share our experience, professional knowledge, and the evidence we are gathering. As prevention scientists, we are attentive to our role in discerning the strengths and weaknesses of existing programs and not merely affirming the efforts of our collaborating schools and agencies.
As prevention scientists, our knowledge, political capital, and political agency are expanded through interprofessional collaborations with nonprofit and governmental agencies beyond K-12 schooling and higher education. Our collaborations with schools, community organizations, and health centers in developing and evaluation CDE have connected us to other nonprofit organizations that strive to foster and disseminate knowledge that will inform policies and practices relevant to PWT informed CDE. These collaborations connect us to knowledge beyond our discipline and to organizational systems positioned for systemic change. Our contribution is to disseminate knowledge related to the psychological dimensions of working and career development that informs their initiatives.
Through collaboration with the Clayton Christensen Institute (https://www.christenseninstitute.org/), we deepened our appreciation of building developmental relationships that foster youth motivation and build social capital networks. The Christensen Institute seeks to advance collective knowledge that promotes equity and success for traditionally marginalized students through networking with a broad range of nonprofits, foundations, and educational and health service agencies. In addition, our collaborations with Jobs for the Future (JFF) have expanded our knowledge base for CDE and WBL and connected us with other professionals and organizations that exert political and social advocacy with regard to youth who are marginalized in their access to decent work. We have recently engaged with JFF authors in conversations that resulted in a publication for post-secondary educators on equity-building approaches to teaching students about work (Blustein & Kenny, 2020; Hoffman & Collins, 2020). JFF is bringing the authors of this volume together with community college leaders to expand project-based experiential learning courses that will enable community college students to develop critical knowledge about the structures of work that limit social mobility and to develop the types of social capital and skills that are needed for navigating these structures in a stalled economy (Hoffman, 2020).
Conclusion
The important role that work plays in the satisfaction of important human needs and as a vehicle for well-being over the life course, the risks posed by the decline in available decent work, and the rise in systemic injustice and economic inequality demand the attention of prevention scholars and practitioners. The extent to which the loss of decent work is experienced by those who are marginalized by racism, poverty, ableism, and other social and economic factors mandates an urgent response aligned with social justice goals. Our commitments to prevention, social justice, and vocational psychology have propelled us to join with university colleagues and community partners to better understand the individual and contextual factors that can reduce the negative impacts of marginalization and poverty on access to decent work and the promotion of schools and workplaces characterized by justice and equity. Our current scholarship focuses on the application of PWT for enhancing the relevance and effectiveness of career education as a work preparation, prevention, and life design strategy for youth experiencing privilege and marginalization, with concern for advancing social justice.
While this article is intended to increase awareness of career development education as a prevention activity, it is also a call for increased collaboration among prevention scholars, vocational psychologists, and career practitioners drawn from the fields of school counseling, counseling/vocational psychology, career guidance, rehabilitation counseling, career coaching and consulting, and multicultural researchers in designing preventive and health-promoting interventions. As so poignantly pointed out by Flores et al. (2019), vocational theory and research have not attended to the experiences of persons of color or to the intersectionality of race and ethnicity with systems of colonialism, patriarchy, and capitalism. While the focus of this article has been on youth career development education, the well-documented relationships between decent work and well-being across the life span call for preventive and health-promoting interventions that integrate social, vocational, educational, and psychological issues for those no longer in school settings. Given the number of adults in our nation and globally who are experiencing the trauma of job loss, fluctuations in employment related to the growing prevalence of temporary and precarious work, vulnerability in work access related to racism and identity-based discrimination, the experience of marginalization, racism, xenophobia, and bullying in the workplace, and the turbulence in the economic, social, health, political, and climate dimensions of our lives, broad-based preventive and health promotion interventions could serve an important need across the life span. To realize deep change, preventionists must simultaneously commit to person level and systemic change (Albee & Ryan-Finn, 1993; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002). We hope that this article will inspire preventionists to consider career development education and lifelong career interventions from a prevention, health promotion, and multicultural lens. It is not enough to merely design these interventions, but there is an urgency for well-designed and culturally sensitive research to assess their efficacy.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
