STUDENTS' EDUCATIONAL PREFERENCES AND OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATIONS
by
PREMALATHA KARUPIAH
Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of
all,
I would like to thank mysupervisor,
Dr. P.Sundramoorthy
for hissupport
andguidance throughout
the process ofcompleting
thisstudy.
I wish to express my indebtedness to my mentor Professor Norman
Blaikie,
whonot
only taught
me the 'ABC's of social research but alsoguided
methrough
every
step
indesigning, implementing
andreporting
thisstudy.
I would like to thank Universiti Sains
Malaysia,
Jabatan PendidikanNegeri
PulauPinang,
Jabatan PendidikanNegeri
Kedah for theirsupport
inproviding
relevantinformation needed in
this study.
I alsoappreciate
thesupport given by
theprincipals
and teachersfrom schools thatwere involved in thisstudy.
Iwould alsolike to thank all the students involved in this
study
withoutwhom thisstudy
couldnot have been made
possible. Finally,
I would like to thank myfamily
and my friends for'always being
there'.TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS II
TABLEOF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES xII
NOMENCLATURE xlii
ABSTRAK xlv
ABSTRACT xvi
CHAPTER 1 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2
Background
of theStudy
21.2.1 Education
System
inMalaysia
31.3 Statementofthe Problem 5
1.4 Research Questions 6
1.5 Research
Objectives
72.3.2 2.4
Giddens' Structuration
Theory
Theorieson
Occupational
Choice17 22 23 24 26
27 27 28 32
35 36 39 48 51 53 55
55 55 56 61 62 63 64 66
67 68 74 75 2.4.1
Sociological
Theories2.4.1.1 Status Attainment
Theory
2.4.1.2 Allocation Model
Theory
2.4.1.3 Human
Capital Theory
2.4.2
DevelopmentaVSelf-Conception
Theories2.4.2.1
Ginzberg's Theory
2.4.2.2 Gottfredson's
Theory
2.4.3
Personality Approach
2.4.3.1 Holland's
Theory
2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8
Research on
Occupational
and Educational Choice Theoretical ModelVoids in Researches in the Fieldof
Occupational
ChoiceSummary
CHAPTER3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Research
Strategies
3.3 Sources of Data 3.4
Sampling
AndSample
3.4.1
Samples
forQuantitative Data 3.4.1.1Sample
of Form Five Students 3.4.1.2Sample
of First YearStudents3.4.1.3
Sample
of Final Year Students 3.5 Instruments3.6 3.7
Pilot
Study
Reliability Analysis
for Data from PilotStudy
3.7.1 ItemtoTotal Correlation 75
3.7.2 Cronbach's
Alpha
763.7.3 Factor
Analysis
773.8
Reliability Analysis
for Data Collected in theStudy
773.9 Data
Coding
783.10 Methods of Data
Analysis
forQuantitative Data 85 3.10.1Frequency
Distribution andContingency
Tables 853.10.2 Correlation and
Multiple
LinearRegression
853.11 Qualitative Data 87
3.11.1
Sample
for Qualitative Data 883.11.2 Methods of Data
Analysis
forQualitative Data 903.12 Ethical Issues 95
3.13
Summary
96CHAPTER 4 97
FINDINGSOF THE STUDY 97
4.1 Introduction 97
4.2 Characteristics of the
Sample
974.3 Profile of Students' Preferences 103
4.4
Answering
Research Questions 1064.4.1 ResearchQuestion 1: What is the
relationship
between students'choice of educational program and their
occupational aspirations?
107CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION
5.1 5.2
Introduction
Relating Findings
to Past Research141 141 141
141 5.2.1
Relationship
between EducationalPreferences,
EducationalChoices and
Occupational Aspirations
5.2.2
Relationship
Between Father'sEducation,
Father'sOccupation
and Mother'sEducation on
Occupational Aspirations
142
143 5.2.3
Relationship
between Father'sEducation,
Father'sOccupation
andMother's Education on Educational Preferences and Educational
5.2.4
Choices
Relationship
between Results and students' EducationalPreferences,
Educational Choices andOccupational Aspirations
147145
5.2.5
Relationship
between Gender andEthnicity
and EducationalPreferences,
EducationalChoices andOccupational Aspirations
148Other Factors Related to Students' Educational Choices and 5.2.6
5.2.7 5.3 5.4
CHAPTER6 CONCLUSION
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4
Occupational Aspirations
150The Process of
Making
Educational andOccupational
Choices 151Summary
of Factors 154Explaining
Educational Preferences andOccupational Aspirations
156Summary
of theFindings
Limitationsof the
Study Generalising
theFindings Significance
of theStudy
159 159 159 161 163 164
REFERENCES 165
Appendix
A 185Appendix
B 190Appendix
C 196Appendix
D 201Appendix
E 207Appendix
F 209Appendix
G 211Appendix
H 212Appendix
I 213Appendix
J 214Appendix
K 215Appendix
L 216Appendix
M 217Appendix
N 218Appendix
O 221Appendix
P 222Appendix
Q 224Appendix
R 227LIST OFTABLES
3.1
Sample
of form fivestudents 653.2
Sample
of first year students in USM 673.3
Sample
offinal year students in USM 683.4 Formal definition of
concepts
693.5
Operational
definition ofconcepts
713.6 Cronbach's
alpha
values forpilot study
763.7 Value of Cronbach's
alpha
for eachconcept
measured inthe
questionnaires
783.8 Dichotomised variables 79
3.9 Numberof
respondents
based ongender
andethnicity
813.10
Age
ofrespondents
823.11
Occupational prestige
score tor 12occupations
in thestudy
823.12 Details
regarding
the twoclusters of students 89 3.13Examples
of how themes aregenerated
trammeaning
units(from
level1
coding
to level 2coding)
933.14
Examples
ofhow sub themesweregenerated
from themes(from
level 2
coding
to level 3coding)
944.1
Sample
distributionsby
Gender 984.2
Sample
distributionsby Ethnicity
994.3
Sample
distributionsby
Father'sOccupation
1004.4
Sample
distributionsby
Mother'sOccupation
1014.5 Sam
pie
distributionsby
Father's Education 1014.6 Sam
pie
distributionsby
Mother's Education 1014.7
Sample
distributionsby Family/Guardian
Income 1024.8
Sample
distributionsby
Results 1034.9 Educational Preferences of students 104
4.10 Educational Choices of first year and final year students 105
4.11
Occupational Aspirations
of students 1054.12
Compatibility
of form five students'Occupational Aspirations
and Educational Preferences 108
4.13
Comparison
between Educational Preferences and EducationalChoices of firstyearstudents 109
4.14
Compatibility
of first year students'Occupational Aspirations
and Educational Preferences 110
4.15
Compatibility
of first year students'Occupational Aspirations
and Educational Choices 110
4.16
Comparison
between EducationalPreferences and EducationalChoices of final year student 111
4.17
Compatibility
of finalyear students'Occupational Aspirations
and Educational Preferences 112
4.18
Compatibility
of final yearstudents'Occupational Aspirations
and Educational Choices 112
4.19
Multiple regression
model forformfivestudents' EducationalPreferences 115
4.20
Multiple regression
model for first year students' EducationalChoices 116
4.21
Multiple regression
model for final yearstudents' EducationalChoices 117
4.22
Multiple regression
modelfor form fivestudents'Occupational
F.1 Itemto item correlation 209
G.1 Item to total correlation 211
L.l Particulars of the first year students inthe
qualitative
datasample
216M.1 Particulars of the final year students in the
qualitative
datasample
217N.l
Sample
distributionsby Primary
Carer 218N.2
Sample
distributionsby Primary
Carer'sAspiration
218N.3
Sample
distributionsby
Friend'sAspiration
218N.4
Sample
distributionsby
Number ofSiblings
219N.S
Sample
distributionsby Age
219N.6
Sample
distributions of form five studentsby
State 219N.7
Sample
distributions of first and final yearstudentsby
State 219N.8
Sample
distributionsby
Area of Residence 220N.9
Sample
distributionsby Religion
220N.10
Sample
distributionsby Type
ofFamily
2200.1
Multiple regression
models for form five students EducationalPreferences 221
0.2
Multiple regression
model for firstyear students EducationalChoices 221
0.3
Multiple regression
model forfinal yearstudents EducationalChoices 221
P.l
Multiple regression
modelfor form fivestudents'Occupational
Aspirations
222P.2
Multiple regression
model for first year students'Occupational
Aspirations
222P.3
Multiple regression
model forfinal year students'Occupational
Aspirations
223PA
Multiple regression
model forstudents'Occupational
Aspirations (Combined Samples).
2230.1
Occupational Aspirations by
Father'sEducation(Form
FiveStudents)
2240.2
Occupational Aspirations by
Father's Education(First
YearStudents)
2240.3
Occupational Aspirations by
Father's Education(Final
YearStudents)
2250.4
Occupational Aspirations by
Father'sOccupation
(Form
FiveStudents)
2250.5
Occupational Aspirations by
Father'sOccupation
(First
YearStudents)
2260.6
Occupational Aspirations by
Father'sOccupation
(Final
YearStudents)
226R.1 Multinomial
logistic regression
model for students'Occupational Aspirations (Combined Samples).
227LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 The education
system
inMalaysia
42.1 The
relationship
ofoccupational
choicetooccupational
preference
andaspiration
in thereality
continuum 102.2 An interaction of Gidden's foundational
concepts
192.3
Simplified path diagram
of theearly
Wisconsin model ofstatus attainment 25
2.4 Holland's
hexagonal
model 362.5 Theoretical model of students' educational
preferences
andoccupational aspirations
493.1
Meaning
units 925.1
Summary
of factorspredicting
educationalpreferences,
educational
cholces
andoccupational aspirations
155B
B
f3
c
nUrsl
r
Fi
Nagelkerke fil
SES VIF
NOMENCLATURE
linear
regression
coefficientlogistic regression
coefficientstandardised linear
regression
coefficientcontingency
coefficientstandardised
contingency
coefficientfrequency
total number ofform five studentsin the
sample
total numberof firstyear students in the
sample
total number offinal year students in thesample
total number of students incombined
sample
Pearson correlation coefficient coefficient of determination
R2-like
measure used inlogistic regression
Socia-economic Status variance inflationfactor
ABSTRAK
PILIHAN PENGAJIAN DAN PEKERJAAN PELAJAR
Pilihan
pengajian
andpekerjaan pelajar
daritiga peringkat pengajian
telahdikaji.
Pengumpulan
data kuantitatif telah dilakukandengan menggunakan tiga sampel pelajar
bersaiz 500 orang yang telahdipilih
dikalangan pelajar tingkatan
lima di Kedah(tidak
termasuk PulauLangkawi)
dan PulauPinang. pelajar
tahun satu di Universiti SainsMalaysia (tidak
termasuk cawanganKubang Krian)
danpelajar
tahun akhir di Universiti SainsMalaysia (tidak
termasuk cawanganKubang Krian). Pengumpulan
data kualitatif telah dilakukan
dengan menggunakan
duasampel
yangsetiap satunya
bersaiz 15pelajar
tahun satu and tahun akhir. Analisis kuantitatif dan kualitatif telahdigunakan
untuk menentukan faktor-faktor yangmempengaruhi pilihan pengajian
danpekerjaan pelajar
sertauntukmenerangkan
proses membuatpilihan pekerjaan.
Proses membuatpilihan pekerjaan
berlaku dalam satujangka
masa yangpanjang.
Prosespilihan pekerjaan bagi pelajar-pelajar
yang berada dalamperingkat
akhirremaja
danperingkat
awal dewasa bolehdibahagikan kepada empat peringkat
iaitu: semasaberada di sekolah
menengah;
semasa memohon kemasukan keperingkat ijazah Sarjana Muda;
semasa menerima tawaran dan mendaftarbagi
kursusijazah Sarjana
Muda dan sebelum tamat
pengajian ijazah Sarjana
Muda.Daripada
analisis datakuantitatif, keputusan peperiksaan, pendidikan ayah
danpekerjaan ayah merupakan
antara
tiga pembolehubah terpenting
yangmempengaruhi pilihan pekerjaan pelajar.
Selain
itu, gender,
etnik danpendidikan
ibujuga mempengaruhi pilihan pekerjaan
pelajar. Keputusan peperiksaan, pendidikan ayah, pekerjaan ayah
danpendidikan
ibupula mempengaruhi pilihan pengajian pelajar. Daripada
analisis datakualitatif,
keputusan peperiksaan pelajar, harapan ibubapa,
minat danpeluang pekerjaan
telahdikenalpasti sebagai
faktor-faktor yang bolehmempengaruhi pilihan pengajian
andpekerjaan
parapelajar. Keempat-empat
faktor inimerupakan
faktor yangpaling kerap
dinyatakan
olehpelajar
tahun satu dan tahunakhirsemasatemuduga.
ABSTRACT
STUDENTS' EDUCATIONAL PREFERENCES AND OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATIONS
Educational
preferences
andoccupational aspirations
of students from threeeducational
stages
wereinvestigated.
Quantitative data were collected from threesamples
ofapproximately
500 students each: form fivestudents in the states of Kedah(excluding
PulauLangkawi)
andPenang;
first year students In Universiti SainsMalaysia (USM, excluding Kubang
Krianbranch);
and final year students in USM(excluding Kubang
Krianbranch).
Twosamples
of 15 first year and 15 final year USM students were drawn forqualitative
data collection. Quantitative andqualitative
dataanalyses
were used to determine factors that influence students' educationalpreferences
andoccupational aspirations.
The process ofmaking occupational
choicesspans over many years. Students' educational
preferences
andoccupational aspirations
have areciprocal relationship
with one another. The process ofoccupational
choice for students who are in their late adolescence andearly
adulthoodcan be divided into four
stages: during secondary school;
whileapplying
for abachelor's
degree
programme; whenaccepting
andenrolling
in a bachelor'sdegree
programme;
and, prior
to thecompletion
of a bachelor'sdegree
programme. The three mostimportant
variablesinfluencing
students'occupational aspirations
found from thequantitative
dataanalysis
are students'results,
father's education and father'soccupation. Other
than thesevariables, gender, ethnicity
and mother's education showsome influence on students'
occupational aspirations.
Students'results,
father'soccupation,
father's education and mother's education show influence on students' educationalpreferences.
Theanalysis
ofqualitative
data on the otherhand, yielded
results ofstudents, parents' expectations,
interests andjob opportunity
as someof thefactors
influencing
students' educationalpreferences
andoccupational aspirations.
These four factors werethe most common factors mentioned
by
thefirst and final year students when interviewed.CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
In modern
society,
almost every individual encounters theproblem
ofchoosing
anoccupation (Ginzberg
etal.,
1951:3). According
to Vroom(1984: 49-50),
this is very different in aprimitive society
whereoccupation
is determinedby
theexisting
divisionof labour and social sanctions
compel
the sons to follow thefootstep
of their fathers.The
development
ofcapitalism, however,
haschanged
this. Itgives
more freedom toan individual to choose an
occupation.
In addition tothis, capitalism
has alsointroduced a
high degree
ofspecialisation, giving
individuals ahigh degree
of freedomin
choosing
theiroccupation (Ginzberg
etai.,
1951:3).
Occupational
choice does notonly
concern an individual but also thesociety (Vroom,
1984:
50).
This is because the individualmaking
anoccupational
choice istrying
toorganise
his/herimpression
about himself/herself and the externalenvironment in order to chooseamong the available alternatives(Ginzberg
etal.,
1951:3). At
thesametime,
the
society
needspeople
to take over the available tasks oroccupations
tosafeguard
the future existence of the
society (Ginzberg
etat.,
1951:3; Vroom,
1984:50).
It alsoensures that the
society operates
wellthrough
theinterdependence
of functions ofdifferent
occupations (Parsons,
1951:29-36).
While
looking
atoccupational choices,
one cannotdeny
theimportance
of educational choices. This is becausethere is areciprocal
influence between the process ofmaking
educational choices and
occupational
choices. Each process hassignificant
implications
for the other. Educational choices haveimplications
foroccupational
choices and viceversa
(Ciavarella,
1972:252; Rottinghaus
etal.,
2002:1-2).
Students'early
educational choices haveimplications
for later educational andoccupational
choices
(Arbona,
2000:270-271).
During
the process ofbeing educated,
an individual isfaced,
at severalpoints,
with adecision to continueor to
drop
outof thesystem.
Inaddition tothis,
ifthe decision is tocontinue,
then the direction of theeducational
course must be decided. The educationalsystem provides
individuals with various alternatives and whilechoosing
between these
alternatives,
the individual makes a commitment to thetype
ofoccupation
he/shewillsubsequently
choose(Miller,
1960:118-119).
1.2
Background
oftheStudy
At the outset, the researcher wishesto state that this is a
sociological enquiry focusing
on educational
preferences
andoccupational aspirations
of students. Education is animportant aspect
ofour modernlifestyle.
The educationsystem plays
animportant
rolein the process of
making occupational
choices(Butler,
1968:11).
The educationalsystem
has two maincommonly expressed
purposes;training intelligent
citizens andpreparing
its clientele forearning
aliving (Miller,
1960:118-119).
(Ministry
ofFinance,
2002:79)
tor thedevelopment
of education. This amountsto64.1 per cent and 65.9 per cent of the allocation made fordevelopment expenditure
forsocial services in 2001 and 2002. This allocation includes the maintenance and
development
ofprimary, secondary
andtertiary
institutions. It also includes anallocation for
scholarships
forhigher
education as well as for the NationalHigher
Education Fund to
provide
loans for students in institutions ofhigher learning (Ministry
of
Finance,
2001:87).
1.2.1 Education
System
inMalaysia
The
objectives
ofMalaysian
EducationSystem
are to achieve nationalunity, produce quality
manpower for nationaldevelopment,
achieve democratisation of education and inculcatepositive
values(http://www.moe.gov.my/objective.htm).
The education
system
inMalaysia
can be divided into threernalor categories: primary.
secondary
andtertiary
education(see Figure 1.1). Primary
education Involves twodifferent
types
ofschools,
national schools and nationaltype
schools. The national schools use BahasaMalaysia
as the main instructionlanguage, together
withEnglish.
National
type
schools use Tamil or Mandarin as their main instructionlanguage, together
withEnglish
and BahasaMalaysia. Primary
education takes six years, i.e.Year 1 toYear 6
(Ministry
ofEducation,
2002:5).
After
completing primary education,
students move on tosecondary
schools. At thisstage,
the students gothrough
five years of education(Form
1 to Form5).
At the endof the five years, form five students sit for a
general
examination known asSijil
Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM),
which isequivalent
to the GeE Q' Levels.Matriculation
S11'M
(Malaysian High SchoolCertificate) National Schools
and
NationalType Schools (Standard 1-6)
Secondary Schools (Form1-5)
Colleges!
Polytechnics
Employment
University
Colleges
Employment
Figure
1.1: The EducationSystem
inMalaysia (Adapted
fromMinistry
ofEducation,
2002:
5)
After
SPM,
students have theoption
of eithercontinuing
their education orseeking employment.
Those who wish to continue their education can either enroll in a pre-university
programme, such as matriculation arSijil Tinggi
PersekolahanMalaysia (STPM),
or enroll in various programmes incolleges
orpolytechnics.
STPM isequivalent
to A' Levels.Matriculation
programmes, which run for are one or two years can be used to meet therequirement
for theentry
into local universities.STPM,
on the otherhand,
is atwo-year
programme that is conducted in selected schools andcolleges
and can be usedto meettheentry requirement
intolocal universities(Ministry
ofEducation,
2002:5).
Every
year, thousands of studentscomplete
theirsecondary
education and move on touniversities was
32,752 (Mcintyre, 2003).
In 1998 and1999,
the total number ofadmissions to bachelor's
degree
programmes was33,870
and31,076, respectively (Chok, 1999). According
to the EconomicReport
2001102(Ministry
ofFinance,
2001:87)
and the EconomicReport
2002103(Ministry
ofFinance,
2002:79),
the student enrolment in universities has increased from100,041
in 1996to245,989
in 2001.1.3 Statement of the Problem
This research studies educational
preferences
andoccupational aspirations
of studentsduring
theperiod
from latesecondary
school to the end ofundergraduate
education.The reasons for
undertaking
thestudy
are asfollows:First,
in viewof thegrowth
ofhigher
education inMalaysia,
it isimportant
to understandwhy
students choose certain educational programmes. It is alsoimportant
tounderstand whether this choice relates to their choice of
occupations, and, therefore, why
students make their choices.Second,
there is amajor
research gap on educationalpreferences
andoccupational
choice in
Malaysia
of adolescents and young adults.According
to Powlett andYoung (1996: 30),
transition from school to work is animportant period
in adolescences oryoung adulthood.
During
this difficultperiod, seemingly
irrevocable decisions(e.g.
regarding
academicsubjects, coursework, training, qualifications
andoccupation)
haveto be made
by
the individual.However,
very little is known aboutthis amongMalaysian
adolescents. Educational and
occupational
choices areimportant
choices thatyouths
mustmake in
life,
andthis choice islikely
to haveprofound
effects on laterexperiences
or choices.
Making
educational andoccupational
choice is not an easy task foryouths
(Galinsky
andFast, 1966;
Powtett andYoung, 1996).
This ismainly
becausechoosing
a
particular type
of educational programme enables a person to pursue either one or afew
types
ofoccupations, while,
at the sametime, restricting
them fromentering
othertypes
ofoccupation. Obtaining
adegree
inlaw,
forexample,
will enable anindividualtopractice law,
pursue a career as alegal
advisor in anorganisation
orteach law relatedcourses in
colleges. However, obtaining
adegree
in law does not enable a person to pursue a career as achemist,
anengineer
or accountant, unless theparticular
individual has other
appropriate qualifications. Therefore,
the progressthrough
theeducational
system requires
that somechoice,
in relation to thetype
oftraining,
andhence,
thetype
ofoccupation,
be madeby
personspassing through
thatsystem (Miller,1960: 117-118).
Third,
very little is known about the processby
whichoccupational
choices are made.According
toGinzberg
et al.(1951),
there are threemajor periods: (i)
thefantasy period,
which isduring
childhood and comes to the end at eleven years ofage; (ii)
thetentative choice
period,
which includes ages eleven toseventeen; and(iii)
theperiod
of realisticchoices,
which starts in late adolescence and goes Intoearly
adulthood.1.4 Research Questions
The various
aspects
of the researchproblem
have been reduced to a concise set of4. To what extent do
preferences
and reasonschange
at different educationalstages?
1.5 Research
Objectives
The research
questions
are translated into thefollowing
setofobjectives.
• To
investigate
therelationship
between students' choice of educational programme andtheiroccupational aspirations.
• To establish the reasons for students' choices of educational programme and
occupation.
• To comparethe choices and reasons atdifferent educational
stages.
1.6
Arrangement
oftheChapters
Thefirst
chapter
consists ofintroductory
informationregarding
thestudy.
Itexplains
theresearch
questions
and theobjectives
of thisstudy.
The secondchapter
is a review ofliterature. It includes a theoretical
framework, specific
theories onoccupational
choiceand a theoretical model. The third
chapter
deals with themethodology
used in thestudy
and the methods of data collection. Itexplains
thepopulation,
thesample
and theinstruments used. The fourth
chapter reports
thefindings
and answers the researchquestions
set out inChapter
1. The fifthchapter provides
a discussion of thefindings,
whilethe final
chapter presents
the conclusion to thestudy.
CHAPTER
2LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
The modern theorists in the field of career
development emerged
in the 19505(Gysbers,
1982:336,1988,1990: 620).
These modern theorists created a broader andmore
comprehensive
view of individuals and theiroccupational developmental
processover the life span. At this
time, occupational
choice wasbeginning
to be seen as adevelopmental
process. The term 'vocationaldevelopment'
becamepopular
in the1950's as a way to describe the
broadening
view ofoccupational (vocational)
choice(Gysbers, 1974, 1997).
In the 1960's and 1970's the term career and careerdevelopment
becamepopular.
Thisdevelopment expanded
theperception
ofcareerasnot
merely
work that isdone by
an individual(Gysbers,
1982:337,1990: 621, 1997).
Career can be defined as
encompassing
avariety
ofpossible patterns
ofpersonal
choice related to an individual's total
life-style, including occupation, education, personal
and socialbehaviour, learning
how tolearn,
socialresponsibility
and leisuretime activities
(Jones
etaI., 1972). According
to Herr and Cramer(1996: 14),
careersare
unique
to each person. Career notonly
includesoccupations
butprevocational
andIt can be concluded from these definitions that
occupational
choice isjust
a subset tocareer
development. Therefore,
this research uses the term'occupational
choice' as itonly
focuses onstudying
students' educational choice andoccupational
choice anddoes not include all
aspects
of career such as leisure activities.However,
terms likecareers and
occupations
areoften usedsynonymously
orinterchangeably (Herr,
1982:373;
Isaacson andBrown,
1997:10; Young
andCollin,
2000:3). Parsons,
in his bookChoosing
aVocation(1967)
used all threeterms i.e.vocation, occupation
andcareerindescribing
the process ofchoosing
anoccupation.
In addition tothis,
it is alsointeresting
to note that many researchers use terms likeoccupation,
vocation andcareer
interchangeably
in their research.Kelly (1989: 182),
forexample,
uses termslike
job/occupation/career
choice orpreference
to denote theconcept
ofoccupational preference
of young adults.The first
part
of thischapter
discusses some of theimportant concepts
related tooccupational
choice. The nextpart
is.regarding
the theoretical framework that wasused in this
study.
This is followedby
the discussion of some of themajor
theories inthe field of
occupational
choice. The next section isregarding
various researches that have been donein the field ofoccupational
choice. Thefollowing
section ofthischapter
discusses the theoretical model that wasused in this
study.
The last sectiondiscussessomethe voids in the researches relatedtofield of
occupational
choice.2.2 Definition of
Occupational
ChoiceOccupational
choice can be defined in various ways. First ofall, occupational
choicecan be defined as
preference referring
to what a personprefers
to do(Crites,
1969:127).
This means thatgiven
variousalternatives,
an individual showspreference
towards a
particular occupation. However,
when individuals state theirpreference they
are
indicating
whatthey
liketo do while inmaking
choicesthey
arepredicting
whatthey might probably
do(Crites.
1969:127).
Otherthanthis. occupational
choice can also bedefined as
occupational aspiration. Occupational aspiration
refers to theoccupation
anindividual considers tobe idealfor him/her
(Crites,
1969:130).
Choice is more
comprehensive
thenpreference
andaspiration.
Choice is based upon a consideration of many factors whichmight
includeaspiration
andpreference.
Theconcept
ofoccupational choice. preference
andaspiration
arerelatively
distincthowever,
theseconcepts
arealso related to each other(Crites,
1969:132) (see Figure 2.1).
Considerable Some None
Extentto which
reality
is the basis at choiceOccupational
choiceOccupational preference Occupational Aspiration
.____---,-__
I
Figure
2.1: Therelationship
ofoccupational
choice tooccupational preference
andaspiration
in thereality
continuum(Crites,
1969:132)
Occupational choice, preference
andaspiration
are related because all theconcepts
involve selection of an
occupation, however,
theseconcepts
differ in the extent whichthey represent reality-oriented
selection. Choice is more realistic incomparison
toGottfredson
(1981)
on the other handgives
a very different definition foroccupational aspiration
andpreference.
Preferences are one's likes and dislikes which ranges from what is most desired to what would be least tolerable. Preferences are the "wish" rather than the
"reality" component
ofaspirations
orgoals
...Anaspiration
is thesingle occupation
named as the best alternative at anygiven
time(Gottfredson,
1981:548).
In this case, Gottfredson's definition of
aspiration
is similar to the idea ofoccupational
choice defined
by
Crites(1969).
Vroom(1984: 49-95)
also differentiates betweenoccupational preference
andoccupational
choice. He defines'preferred occupation'
asthe
occupation
which is most attractive to a person while 'chosenoccupation'
is afunctionof attractiveness andthe chancesof
obtaining
theoccupation.
In a similar manner, researchers have used various terms to refer to educational
aspirations
of an individual.According
to Pavalko andBishop (1966: 288),
theeducational
plans
of students have often been studied under the rubric of educationalaspirations. mobility
orientation andcollege plans.
In this
study
theconcept
ofoccupational
choice will cover bothpreference
andaspiration
because thisstudy
involvesstudentsfrom three different educationalstages.
One group consists of form five students in
secondary
schools. These students are about tocomplete
theirsecondary
education. The next group consists of first year students in Universiti SainsMalaysia.
This group of students are in thebeginning
oftheir
tertiary education.
Thethird group consists of final year students who areabout tocomplete
theirbachelor'sdegree
programme in Universiti SainsMalaysia
andmight
beentering
the labour market very soon. It isimportant
to cover bothconcepts
in thisstudy
because of the nature of students involved. All these students have not made realentry
into the labour market.They
areonly stating
theoccupation they might
pursue when
they complete
their bachelor'sdegree
programmes. These groups ofstudents
aredealing
with different levels ofreality
and urgency to make a choiceregarding
theiroccupation. Therefore,
both terms,'Occupational Aspirations'
and'Occupational
Choices' is usedinterchangeably
in thisstudy.
2.3 Theoretical Framework
The process of
occupational
choice can be describedusing
varioussociological
theories. In thisstudy,
sixoccupational
theories have been chosen todeductively generate conceptual
andoperational
variables and these are: Status AttainmentTheory,
Allocation ModelTheory,
HumanCapital Theory, Ginzberg's Theory,
Gottfredson'sTheory
and Holland'sTheory.
In addition tothis,
in order toexplain
theweb of relations that determine educational and
occupational choices,
this researchuses rational choice
theory
and Giddens' structurationtheory.
The
justifications
forselecting
these two theories(rational
choicetheory
and Gidden's structurationtheory)
are that theseessentially
characterise the twoopposing assumptions
about the nature of humanbeings
andthey
relate to thediffering ontological
andepistemological assumptions
inherent of the three researchstrategies
that have been chosen to
guide
thestudy.
Giddens' structurationtheory belongs
to amore 'determinist' school and offers a
contextually
situated butpowerful agent
as the2.3.1 Rational Choice
Theory
Rational choice
theory
has its roots in economics. Economics has assumed thatpeople
are motivated
by
money andby
thepossibility
ofmaking
aprofit,
and this has allowed itto construct
formal,
and oftenpredictive,
models of human behaviour.Sociologists
also have tried to build theories around the idea that all action isfundamentally
rational incharacter and that
people
calculate thelikely
costs and benefits of any action beforedeciding
what to do. Thisapproach
totheory
is known as rational choicetheory,
and itsapplication
to social interactiontakes the form ofexchange theory (Ritzer, 1996, 2000).
A
pioneering figure
inestablishing
rational choicetheory
insociology
wasGeorge
Homans
(1961).
who set out a basic framework ofexchange theory,
which hegrounded
inassumptions
drawn from behaviouristpsychology.
Homans' formulation ofexchange theory
remains the basis of allsubsequent
discussion of thistheory, During
the 1960s and
1970s,
Blau(1964),
Coleman(1973),
and Cook and Emerson(1978)
extended and
enlarged
hisframework,
andthey helped
todevelop
moreformal,
mathematical models of rational action.
Rational choice
theory
focuses on actors(Ritzer,
2000:408).
Basic to all forms of rational choicetheory
is theassumption
thatcomplex
socialphenomena
can beexplained
in terms of theelementary
individual actions of whichthey
arecomposed.
This
standpoint,
calledmethodological individualism,
holdsthat:The
elementary
unit of social life is the individual human action.To explain
social institutions and social
change
is toshow howthey
arise asthe resultof the action and interaction of individuals
(Elster,
1989:13).
Rational choice
theory postulates
that individuals are seen as motivatedby
the wantsor
goals
that express theirpreferences. They
act withinspecific, given
constraints andon the basis of the information that
they
have about the conditions under whichthey
are
acting.
At itssimplest,
therelationship
betweenpreferences
and constraints can beseen in the
purely
technical terms of therelationship
of a means to an end. As it is notpossible
for individuals to achieve all of the variousthings
thatthey want, they
mustalso make choices in relation to both their
goals
and the means forattaining
thesegoals.
Rational choicetheory
holds that individuals mustanticipate
the outcomes of alternative courses of action and calculate that which will be best for them. Rational individuals choose the alternative that islikely
togive
them thegreatest
satisfaction(Heath,
1976:3; Carling,
1992:27).
The idea of 'rational action' has
generally
been taken toimply
aconscious social actorengaging
in deliberate calculativestrategies.
This means that actions taken are meant toachieve certaingoals.
Actors alsocan be seen ashaving
ahierarchy
ofpreferences
that
might
influence their actions(Ritzer,
2000:408).
When students decide to pursue a
tertiary qualification, they
need to choose fromvarious available fields. How do
they
make the choice?According
to Homans(1974:
25):
The more valuable to a person is the result of his
action,
the morelikely
heis to
perform
the action.This that will choose in certain if the
behaviour. This behaviour can,
therefore,
be studied inpurely
external andobjective
terms.
People
learn from theirpast experiences,
and their behaviourcan beexplained through
theseexperiences.
In
choosing
between alternativeactions,
a person will choose that one forwhich,
asperceived by
him at thetime,
thevalue, V,
of theresult, multiplied by
theprobability,
p, ofgetting
theresults,
is thegreater (Homans,
1974:43).
When
making
educationalchoices,
theassumptions
are that students will have certainexpectations regarding
the result ofpursuing tertiary
education.Every
field ofstudy
willoffer different
experiences
for the students and at the same time it will narrowtheirjob opportunity
to one orseveral fields.Therefore,
students will choose afield,
whichthey consider,
will reward them withsomething they
consider valuable. The rewards can be either materialistic oraltruistic (Ritzer,
2000:414). John,
forexample, might
choose topursue an educational programme in the field of education because he likes
working
with
children,
whileCathy might
pursue adegree
inengineering
because of thegood
remuneration offered in industrial sector. Other rewards
might
berecognition,
socialstatus and the
opportunity
tohelp
or meetpeople.
Before
making decisions,
thistheory suggests
thatpeople usually
examineand
makecalculations
regarding
the rewards associated with each course of action(Ritzer,
2000:416). They
also compare the amountof rewards associated with each courseof action(Ritzer,
2000:416).
In the sameway, beforedeciding
what course to pursue, students will look at various fields ofstudy,
the rewards frompursuing
those fields and alsothe chances ofobtaining
the rewards.Any
reward that ishighly
valued will be devalued if actors think it isunlikely
thatthey
will achieve it(Ritzer,
2000:416). Students
can alsoact in the similar mannerwhen
making occupational
choice.Toward the end of
high school,
whenyoungsters begin
toimplement
theirchoices in
actually seeking training
andjobs, they
become more sensitiveto which
particular jobs
are mostreadily
available to them.Youngsters
willbalance their
preferences
for differentoccupations
toimplement
'betterbets'.
People
will notnecessarily
continue to pursue their mostpreferred
options
but will often takeadvantage
ofopportunities
toobtain
asatisfactory job (Gottfredson,
1981:549).
Vroom
(1984: 49-95)
discusses similar ideas in hisexpectancy theory.
In hisexpectancy theory
heexplains
that thereare twodimensions that motivates apersonto choose anoccupation:
the valence dimension andexpectancy
dimension. Both these dimensions must be athigh
levels for behaviour to occur. Brooks and Betz(1990)
summarises Vroom's
expectancy theory
as:The
preferred occupation
is the one that the person views ashaving
themost
positive
valence or attractiveness. The chosenoccupation
is the onetoward which there is most
positive
force and is viewed as a function of both the attractiveness and theexpectancy
for attainment of theoccupation. Thus,
persons will be motivated to considerchoosing
anoccupation only
ifthey
are both attractedtotheoccupation
and believethey
will be able to attain the
occupation (Brooks
andBetz,
1990:57),
The value of
rewards,
and theappraisal
ofchances,
areusually acquired
and modifiedthrough social experiences (Blau
etal., 1956).
Both
[preferences
andappraisals]
are conceivedto beroughly
ordered in ahierarchical fashion for each person -- a
hierarchy
ofpreferences (valuations)
and ahierarchy
ofexpectancies (appraisals).
The course ofaction upon which an individual decides will reflecta
compromise
between hispreferences
and hisexpectations (an attempt
to maximizeexpected value). Thus,
his actual choice willprobably
not be identical with his firstpreference
if hisexpectation
ofreaching
thepreferred goal
is very low.(Blau
etai.,
1956:533)
A student who values
highly
the status andrecognition
forbeing
in a medical fieldmight
not choose the field if he/she thinks that the chances ofgetting
into medicalschool is very slim due to poor results in science