SDS Evaluation

 

 

My Personal Experience

            The experience of taking the SDS was an exercise in redundancy.  I am confident in my self-knowledge about my personality, interests and work preferences and the SDS did not supplement this knowledge in any way.  Perhaps, if I needed some sort of external validation of what I already knew, I might have found the evaluation to be personally useful.  The evaluation is obviously designed for individuals that do not have a clear idea of who they are and what they hope to achieve in their careers.  Luckily, the time commitment for taking this evaluation was small which helped to keep my annoyance to a minimum.  I approached the questions with as much honesty as possible but the categories that held the questions could be easy to manipulate to achieve a certain result.  The occupations finder was somewhat tedious to search through and I would prefer to have taken this instrument on a computer with software that included a search engine that would allow for more instantaneous results.  I would not be surprised to find the same kind of reactions from technologically proficient high school students and plan to offer a computerized alternative, if one is available, to the traditional pencil and paper instrument.  So, by completing this inventory, I learned for the first time how much I have come to expect the use of technology when it is reasonably easy to offer as an incentive to completing a required task.

Scores

            My overall score was SAE.  The “S”, social, score held the highest number of points, 47, but was closely followed by the “A”, artistic, score of 44.  The “E”, enterprising, score was ten points lower than the artistic score.  Overall, the scores between the six different categories held a 29-point range, which signified differentiation in scores.  The SAE type has consistency in placement on the RIASEC hexagon.  The experience of learning about the resulting scores was not difficult but was also not very enlightening.  The SAE type is a Social Artistic Enterprising type.  The possible characteristics of these types, listed on pages 2 and 3 of You and Your Career, that I most identified with, those which most supported my view of myself, are complicated, expressive, idealistic, independent, intuitive, convincing, responsible, understanding, adventurous, ambitious, and self-confident.  Several of my friends typed me as an SAE when I asked for their opinions.  I am not surprised by the resulting type and the characteristics listed but I do not think it gives an overall picture of my abilities.  There are many realistic occupations that I am able to carry out with finesse if not with relish.  If I had taken this instrument with the mindset of what I was capable of instead of what I most enjoyed, the results might have been quite different.  This difference is reflected in my high score on the “R” competencies and the very low “R” score in occupations of interest.  I guess one could argue that this challenges my idea of my capability to achieve satisfaction in a given occupation without having a strong interest in that career.

            There are not very many questions dealing with the vast range of interests and abilities associated with computer technology.  I have to wonder how my interests in computer technology would have fit into the scores and how that would have affected my final score.  The instrument shows a lack of attention to cutting edge technology that would seem to date its applicability to present and future career opportunities for many artistic and social types. 

Implications

            My choice to follow the career path of helping professions in the role of a school counselor is congruent to my scores and resulting type of SAE.  The vast array of responsibilities that school counselors face each day would take a person adept at social, artistic and enterprising problem solving techniques.  The SDS evaluation validated my own personal opinions of what career would be appropriate for my type and it also offered alternative occupational choices if I was not feeling committed to the job of a school counselor.  I expected these results even though it was my first experience with this particular instrument.  This instrument did not challenge my self-view in any manner but I can see where it could challenge a parents view of who their child is and where their interests or abilities are strongest.  It also could be helpful to students that have not developed strong understandings of themselves.

Future Clients

            I am seeking K – 12 certification and will probably choose to use this instrument with high school students seeking better self-understanding.  This instrument may help to clarify personal characteristics and interest and how they translate into satisfying occupational choices.  Promoting a clients understanding of these concepts could facilitate their exploration of career opportunities.  It could also help a client make choices regarding post secondary education and its usefulness in occupations that the client is considering.  I would discuss with my clients the approach, hopefully an honest one, they should take when considering the questions.  I would also be prepared to discuss the limitations of this instrument and the client’s ability to put the results into whatever perspective in which the client is comfortable.  This instrument would work best with a client that is open to learning more about their personality and how that can fit with their interests to make satisfying career decisions.

            This instrument would not be helpful with clients that are too young to cognitively consider specific choices about interests and abilities.  It takes a certain amount of experiential learning to be able to address the questions in the SDS and high school students would have a broader base of knowledge to use than would younger students.  The SDS may not work well with a student that is not psychologically minded or resistant to the process of self examination.  It also may not be useful to the client who is considering a career path that is not fully addressed by the instrument, i.e. differing aspects of computer technology.  Overall, if used appropriately with the right client, this instrument could be an effective tool in helping a client make choices about their future career development.