The nature of career counseling, counseling, and psychotherapy is considered, as is the use of the terms counseling and psychotherapy in the works of Carl Rogers as illustration of the cause of confusion in our terminology. It is suggested here that there are two kinds of counseling, situational and personal, and that these are not dichotomous but rather a continuum.

The C-DAC model seeks to implement current development theory and to use innovative assessment measures together with improved counseling methods to improve vocational and life career counseling. At this stage, the project pays more attention to assessment, partly because if one is to counsel with career maturity in mind, one must understand the developmental status of the counselee. In career counseling, facts as well as feelings are important. Therefore, in this article the authors deal with the assessment of career development in detail, treating interests (measured by the Strong) and expressed preferences as basic status data to be viewed in the light of career maturity, the salience of life roles, and the values sought in life as moderator variables. The instruments are described and their use shown in a sample profile for assessment and checking by the reader in another readily available published source.

A class of twenty-four students who had previously been given intelligence, interest, and personality tests wrote to a newspaper graphologist for vocational guidance, their university connection being disguised and the requests being staggered over a period of more than one week. The vocational recommendations and the diagnoses of personality traits were then compared with the test scores. It was found that: 1. Assuming that a certain minimum intelligence is necessary for a given occupation, the occupations recommended by the graphologist showed no more than a change relationship with the recommendations which a psychologist would have made on the basis of intelligence tests. 2. Assuming that a certain pattern of interests is desirable for adjustment in an occupation, the occupation recommended by the graphologist were quite different from those which a psychologist would have recommended on the basis of an interest inventory, certain unsuitable occupations being recommended with more than chance frequency by the graphologist. 3. The graphologist's estimates of the students' personality traits showed no more than a chance agreement with those made by a psychologist on the basis of personality inventories in the case of four traits, and in the case of the two others were worse than change, again revealing a constant error. 4. There was reason for ascribing these constant errors to a belief in the existence of opportunities in certain areas rather than to poor diagnosis alone, and to the use of clues to personality traits not intrinsic in handwriting. 5. It was pointed out that, with certain graphological principles gaining acceptance in scientific circles, it is still important to check the activities of persons who claim to use these newer principles.

Journal of Counseling & DevelopmentVolume 71, Issue 1 p. 83-83 Response: The Comments, the Theory, and the Model Donald E. Super, Corresponding Author Donald E. Super Consultant Department of Counseling at the University of Georgia, AthensDepartment of Counseling, College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30601Search for more papers by this author Donald E. Super, Corresponding Author Donald E. Super Consultant Department of Counseling at the University of Georgia, AthensDepartment of Counseling, College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30601Search for more papers by this author First published: September‐October 1992 https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1992.tb02177.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES (Not in Dr. Fouad's Comments) D. Brown, & L. Brooks (Eds.). (1990). Career choice and development ( 2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar Super, D. E., & Nevill, D. D. (1986). The Salience Inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press. Google Scholar Volume71, Issue1September‐October 1992Pages 83-83 ReferencesRelatedInformation

This study examined the relationship between career maturity and commitment to work, sex, socioeconomic status, and college level. Three hundred seventy-two undergraduate students took The Career Development Inventory which measures specific dimensions of career development and The Salience Inventory, a measure of the relative importance of a number of life-roles. Commitment to work was related to both the attitudinal and the cognitive factors of career maturity. Sex and socioeconomic status were not related to career maturity. Seniors and juniors had engaged in more career-planning activities than had sophomores and freshmen. University females were more committed to work and to home than were university males, but expected to realize fewer values than males through the work role. Results were discussed in light of Bandura's concept of self-efficacy expectations and implications for counseling.

It has often been contended that vocational or career maturity is largely determined by socioeconomic status and sex. But these, although surely important determinants, may function as such only because they determine commitment to working careers. This latter may itself be the immediate determinant of career maturity. In this study data were collected from some 382 students of whom about 55% were girls, using a Personal Data Blank, the Salience Inventory, and the Career Development Inventory. Measures of career and home commitment were obtained from the second, while measures of career or vocational maturity were derived from the last-named instrument. Canonical correlations and variance analyses were done to examine the roles of SES and sex when combined with career commitment. Four hypotheses received full support, three were partially supported, and one was not supported.