The development of the FED classification system

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 3- OCCUPATIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS

SCOPE OF THE CHAPTER
A  description    r~f c/ass€fication  models.  A  discus.<·>ion  and criticism l!{ occupational class{fication .\)’Stem.\’ in use.

THE NATURE OF CLASSIFICATION SYST~-::MS

A classification system results whenever units, items, ideas, things or people are put into categories. There can be a few or many categories in the system. People can be classitied  by gender  (two  categories)  or by  religion  (many  categories).  Citizenship classifies  people according  to  country of nationality.  lt is  a dynamic  classification system  because the  categories    change  constantly  with  political  developments.  An example of a static classification system is the division of matter into solids, liquids, gases and plasma.These static categories may change if scientists build new matter.
The fact that the units change (water is a solid at tl-eezing point, a gas at boiling point and a liquid between these two temperatures) does not affect the static nature of the system.
Categories arise only from  item similarity. Classification is the process of organising or arranging   units   into   categories   on   the  basis   of   their   interrelationships. A classiJication system is the end product of this process. A list of items like an alphabe- tical  book  index  is  not  a classification  system  unless  all  units  are organised  under headings.
Organising  data  into  categories  1s  probably  a  natural human  activity.  Plural  word forms  and  collective  nouns are found  111  any  language.  Social  groups  develop their own categories.    For example houses have an « outside » and an « inside », which means di1Terent things for different families.    I![/(Jrmal classification systems are not recorded because they have no impact on society.
Fleishman and Quaintance ( 1984, p 22) set out the reasons for classifying units into j(mnal  categories.  For  illustration,  assume  that  a town’s  dwelling  places  are  being counted  in  the   categories   house/cottage, flat/townhouse and squatter   hut.   This classification system allows for:

• eosier comnlltllication because people con talk abo11t the categories without explaillillg the 1vords they are using. Once the definition of « house » is given, it cannot be confused with « townhouse ». Despite technical details of definition, when the basic concept of « house » is understood, it can be discussed with non-experts. Experts can discuss theoretical issues.
• observation a11d CO/lilting 1vitho11t d11plicatiou or overlappi11g (?!. il!formation. Once a dwelling is placed in one category, it cannot belong to another.
• recording and easy retrieval of information abo11t the categories.
• geneml stotements including descriptions (~l relotiouships between categories (for example, houses are not in the flatlands).
• comiJ{.fl’iso/1 (ldata over time or geographical dista/lce.
  FORMAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
  Particular   needs  must  be  met  by  formal  classification  systems   used  in   scientific research.  Science  seeks  new  information,  generates   new  concepts,   develops   new methods  and  states   new  truths.   All  this  activity  is  pointless  without  classification systems to describe or store the new knowledge.
  A university is organised into faculties and departments.  The kind  of scientific (in a broad sense) truths sought in the physics, archaeology and linguistics departments is unique  and  ditTerent  skills  are  needed.  Before research  takes  place hypotheses  are generated about the interactiot) of the units to be studied,  in other words how new knowledge  will  slot  into  the  established  structure.   Existing   knowledge  and  inter- relationships  are  investigated.   Scholars  tl-om  other parts of the  world  can access kno,vledge  through  specialised journals  and  by  using  keywords  to  explore  related topics.  Construct  validity after the  research  proves that  relationships  exist  between the newly established and  existing constructs.  The  prospect of conducting scientific research without classification systems would be daunting.

Scientific hasis

The  classitication  system  must  be  based  on  previous  knowledge. lt must take  into account  the  known  characteristics  of the  units  being  classitied,  but not  necessarily copy previous classifications either in structure or content. Rules for classifying units into categories may be deductive and subjective, but must be stated. Gaps in know- ledge,  existing and  possible relationships among the  units  and  categories should be able to be identitied for fl.1ture research.

Cohesion

This could also be referred to as the intemal validity of the system. The system must have a structure and be logical in itself and to the people who use it.

Com,wchensivencss

Powerful  classification  systems  are  those  where  every  unit  can  be  put  somewhere.
The system must  provide for mutually exclusive and exhaustive classification. Dyna- mic  systems  allow  for  the  addition  of new  categories or  units.  Classification takes place either when a natural structure of units is being sought and/or when fitting data to existing classes.
The processes of devising the classification system and assigning units to the classes initially take place at the same time. After the classification system is in place, further units are added to it and, if necessary, more categories are created.

Ra tionalit

DitTerent people should classify units into the same categories under different circum- stances and at ditTerent times.  This is dictated largely by whether adequate definitions are laid down for categories and for differentiating between units.

Usefulness

In the end, there is no need for a formal classification system unless it can be used.
Usefulness includes all the communication aspects of informal systems. It is proved when the system is successfully used.
Cl(lssification models McCormick  ( 1979,  p  155)  listed  five  classification  models.  These  are  teleological, linnaean,  Darwinian,   statistically   derived  and  co-societive   models.   Two   that    he omitted  were numbered  category and   matrix classification models.  A new network classification model is suggested by the author.

Teleological model

This is  the oldest  type  of classification  system and  involves  an a priori,  subjective judgment  about   the  « essence »  (intrinsic  property)  of the    units  being  classified.  It introduced the idea that there is more to informal classification systems than our own choices or points of view.  Everything in Ancient Greek experience was classified by its purpose in nature or essence.
Aristotelian science, which divided elements into metals and the others into sulphurs, spirits, salts etc. was based on this precept (O’Hear,  1985). lt is seen in classifications based  on the usefulness to man of the units. Thus a political scientist might classify systems of government by aims (economic, social upliftment, power etc.)
The teleological classification model was developed when all thought and science was philosophical.  Face validity was more important than factorial validity, and depended on  philosophical  argument.  Arguments attempted  to  include everything,  leaving  no missing data or space for future research and  resulting in exhaustively defined cate- gories.  A new unit (for example, a new system of government)     meant adding a new category.  This  could  affect  the  arguments  used  to  define  previous  categories  and result in reclassitication ofunits.
Teleological classification is viewed as ideological by modern scientists. Philosophical argument is more important than scientific proof in establishing relationships between units.  It does not provide for future research. Validity is questionable. However, it is still applied in historical classifications and in the social sciences.

CHAPTEI~ l- INTROOIJCTION
Introduction to this study
A brief history of career guidance
Interest tests- the background
Occupational classification systems – the background
The present situation
Problem statemem
Overview of chapters
CIL-\PTEI{ 2- VOCATIONAL INTEI{EST TESTS
The dclinition of vocational interest
Interest tests in career guidance
Interest measurements in use
Historical perspective- USA
Historical perspective- SA
Descriptions of interest tests
« \’tmng I’ocotiollal/nterest Blank (SV!B)
Kuder Preji.’rence Record
/9 Field flllerestlllveniOIJl (19NI)
f’ocatiunullmeresl Questionnaire (VIQ)
flo/land Z.VJN tests (.)DS and SA IH)
Psychometric qualities of interest tests
Classification ofimerest tests
Criteria for psychometric tests
The impact of psychometric tests
Evaluation of interest tests
Psychometric properties of interest tests
l<ationole
r·atidity
l?eliobilitv
0/Jjectivizr
Discussion
Summary
CIIAI’TEn 3 -OCCUPATIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
The nature of classification systems
Formal classification systems
Evaluation criteria tor tormal classification systems
Classification models
l’e/eologicol model
Linnaea11 model
Donrinion model
.Matrix model
Numhcred cotegot}’ model
Co-societi1·e model
StotisticulzJ’ derin~d model
Nenrork occess model
Occupational classilication systems
Commercial applications
.loh WtUZJ’Sts hy personnel proctitioners
litsk mtozvsis /~y 1vork s/11(6; proctitio11ers
Alinne.\Dfll rhemy r!f \l’ork odj11stmelll
/he /)osition AnozJ’sis Questionnaire (V4Q)
Government applications
/he Dictin11my r!fOccllpotiono/ l’it/es (DOJ)
Discussion
Summary
CHAPTER 4- TI-lE MEASURING lNSTIHJM ENT
Introduction
The development of the FED classification system
Ensuring the scientific basis of the system
The purpose of the system
Characteristics ofjobs
The classification model
Ensuring the cohesion ofthe system
Choice oftlelds
Choice of environments
Choice of duties
Units for classification
Ensuring the comprehensiveness ofthe system
Ensuring the rationality ofthe system
Operationalising the instrument
Rating method
Test administration
Summary
CI-IAPTEn 5- llESEAilCII DESIGN
Introduction
Statistical methods
z2 rest
82 coet11cienr
Aim ofthe investigation
The research design
Validating the occupational classification system
Validating the interest test
Summary
CIIAPTEI~ 6- EVALUATION OF TilE FED AS AN OCCUPATIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTI’:!\1
Introduction
The scienti t1c basis of the system
The cohesion of the system
The comprehensiveness of the system
The rationality of the system
The usefulness of the system
Evalumion ofrese:1rch
Summary
CIIAPTEI~ 7- EVALUATION Of TilE FED AS AN INTEREST TEST
Introduction
Test rationale
Construct validity
Predictive validity
Concurrent validity
The 19.FLI
The VIQ
The SDS
The 16PF
Reliability
S t a ncla rei i sar ion
Objectivity
Evalumion ofresearch
Measurement instrument, rating and interpretation
Statistical methods
Sample group and limitations on external validity
Controls
Summary
CHAPT£1l 8- DISCUSSION AND SUM MAllY
Summary ofthis study
The impact of the study
The network access model
The occupational classification model
The FED interest test
Future research
Concluding remark
APPENDICES
llEFEilENCE LIST
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
THE VALIDATION OF THE FIELD – ENVIRONMENT- DUTY OCCUPATIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND INTEREST TEST