Understanding and facilitating career development of people of Appalachian culture: an...

The literature on career development for people of Appalachian culture is sparse. This article reviews cultural values of Appalachians and proposes an innovative career intervention model to best serve people of this culture. The model integrates the concepts of the social cognitive career development

approach (R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, & G. Hackett, 1994) and ecological counseling principles (R. K. Conyne & E. P. Cook, 2004). As this model demonstrates, providing contextual and cultural accommodation is critical in order to gain the trust and permission to work with people of Appalachian culture.

**********

Research on career development of minority groups has been increasingly popular in the past 2 decades, but literature on people of Appalachian culture is more limited. Most of the literature focuses on the four major minority groups as identified in the multicultural textbooks: Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, African Americans, and Native Americans. People of Appalachian culture have become an invisible minority because they do not appear outwardly different from mainstream Americans. This is particularly true of the "urban Appalachian" minority because they are encountered unexpectedly outside the area labeled Appalachia. Often considered as simply part of a lower socioeconomic group rather than as a cultural minority, people of Appalachian culture have their own distinct cultural values that differ from those of mainstream Americans.

Appalachians are defined as people born in the geographic area along the spine of the Appalachian Mountains, which include the Great Smoky Mountains and the Cumberland Mountains. The legal geographical boundaries were set by the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (ARDA; 1965) and include 406 counties in 13 states (all of West Virginia and parts of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia). ARDA created the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), which divided Appalachia into three subregions: Northern (all Appalachian counties in Maryland, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania and some in Virginia and West Virginia), Central (all Appalachian counties in eastern Kentucky and some in Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia), and Southern (remaining Appalachian counties of Tennessee and Virginia, plus those in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina). Two thirds of the region is composed of rural counties (populations less than 10,000), with one third of the Appalachian population living in them, which is more than double the percentage of the rural population in all of the United States. Central Appalachia has the highest concentration of rural counties and the fewest urban ones. African Americans represent about 8% of the total population for people of Appalachian culture but a higher percentage (about 17%) of urban Appalachians (Maloney & Auffrey, 2004). Urban Appalachians, as referred to in this article and as titled by themselves (e.g., Urban Appalachian Council), are people of Appalachia who have migrated from the ARC region to cities outside Appalachia, not those living in cities within the ARC boundaries (Couto, 2002; Lewis, 2002; Obermiller & Howe, 2002). Estimates vary that from 2 to 5 million Black and White people of Appalachian culture migrated into midwestern urban areas between 1940 and 1970, resulting in large subcultures in such cities as Detroit, Chicago, and Cincinnati (Berry, 2000; Borman & Obermiller, 1994; Hobbs, 1998; Jones, 2002; Wilson, 1983). The basic difference between people who remained in Appalachia and those who migrated to urban areas outside Appalachia was primarily home and/or land ownership, thus having an entrenched economic stake in the community. Company ownership of workers' homes was one contributing factor to mobility. Sharecropping was another. There was no great demand for housing in most Appalachian areas during the 1940s to the 1970s, which made it difficult to convert what was often a family's sole asset to cash for moving expenses. No cultural differences were apparent between migratory and stay-at-home groups (Maloney, 2006).

Most of the definitive studies of Appalachian culture have concentrated on eastern Kentucky and Ohio and some parts of West Virginia and Tennessee (Obermiller & Maloney, 2002). Caudill's (1963) book Night Comes to the Cumberlands: A Biography of a Depressed Area has been a classic study and one in which he, for example, emphasized Appalachian people's sense of fatalism. However, it is not sensible to make overarching generalizations about the entire culture and needs of Appalachian people throughout the region, because they vary greatly. Similarly, it is not appropriate to assume all people of Appalachian culture are poor. In the literature, it is difficult to separate Appalachian culture from the culture of poverty because they are often intertwined (Payne, 1996). Many people of Appalachia and urban Appalachians, who may still need services, cannot be classified as poor. Interventions focused on poverty do not adequately address their needs. As an example, a 2001 survey conducted in Hamilton County (Greater Cincinnati, Ohio) found that 9 out of 10 families termed Appalachian are in the middle- or upper income brackets, with the largest proportion in the middle-income group (Obermiller & Maloney, 2002). Although the within-group differences exist, there are the same underlying cultural themes, such as trust issues and family solidarity, that are shared across the regions or social class.

People of Appalachia and Their Culture.

Appalachian people have retained their basic culture in the face of inroads by mainstream America and have also carried that culture into the urban areas to which they have migrated, often through the second and third generations (Bailey, 1997; Fisher, 1993; Obermiller & Howe, 2002). Appalachian identity and pronunciation still seem to have negative connotations for people (Bailey, 1997; Knight, Poteete, Sparrow, & Wrye, 2003). The stereotypes of "redneck" and "hillbilly" still influence how people of Appalachian culture are regarded (Bailey, 1997; Hartigan, 1997; Obermiller, 1999), yet many Appalachian people continue to use their lower status dialect as a means of cultural cohesiveness (Jones, 2002).

White, Black, and American Indian families are well represented among Appalachian population groups, but Celtic immigrants (mainly English and Scots) are believed to have had the major influence on the culture because of their Celtic clan social framework (Crotty, n.d.). Cherokee Indians, native to much of the area, frequently intermarried (Duggan, 2002; Prajznerova, 2003), and today many people of middle Appalachia (i.e., Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, and southeastern Ohio) claim some Cherokee ancestry. Most African Americans of Appalachia settled there after the Civil War or when working on the railroads and are well represented in the coal mines of Kentucky and West Virginia (Maloney & Associates, 2003; Wagner, Obermiller, & Turner, 2004; Wilkinson, 1999).

Family and community ties were strengthened by frequent isolation from mainstream culture. Living far from cities and neighbors, often with poor or no roads, the inhabitant of Appalachia was dependent on family and kin, sometimes for his or her very survival. Telephones did not come to much of Appalachia until the 1950s, and the Frontier Nursing Service provided medical personnel on horseback to the isolated hollows of Kentucky until Jeeps were introduced about 50 years ago (Breckinridge, 1972). Travel was difficult throughout much of Central Appalachia, and there was little industrial development. This all increased isolation and greater dependence on the family, church, and community for support and self-identification (Obermiller & Maloney, 1994; Wilson, 1983). These factors also encouraged the independence of the people of Appalachia and a mistrust of outsiders, both individuals and organizations (Drake, 2001; Fisher, 1993; Maloney & Associates, 2003; Obermiller & Maloney, 1994; Wilson, 1983).

Appalachian social relationships appear less hierarchical than in mainstream American culture, yet social standing is dependent on family. Status allocation is based on "being rather than doing," and who you are related to is valued more highly than "degrees and honors" (Maloney & Associates, 2003, p. 3). Equality is valued and being considered "better than others" (p. 3) is looked down on. Members share a mistrust of governmental and outside agencies (including schools), preferring independence and being in control (Fisher, 1993). Political affiliation is usually divided along extended family/kinship lines with self-determinism as the dominant creed (Fisher, 1993; Little, 2002; Maloney, 1993). Parents are particularly distrustful of career education programs that prepare their children for opportunities not available in their home area and that could require them to leave the family. Many feel they are in contention with the schools over the future of their children (Woodrum, 2004).

The Christian church in Appalachia is usually considered part of the extended family/kinship system, and the area is overwhelmingly Christian (Welch, 1999). Brewer (1962), writing more than 40 years ago and describing the Appalachian religious heritage, said its characteristics include "opposition to central authority of state or church" (p. 201). Spiritual and religious views permeate the culture, and the church has a strong influence on everyday lives. Many would never consider a job that went against the teachings of their church (Welch, 1999). Church affiliation has declined slightly in urban areas but remains strong (Obermiller & Maloney, 2002).

When in need of help, Appalachians first turn to the extended family, which includes their church, and second to their community and neighboring churches. If they are still unable to find the assistance they need, only then will they seek help from a "specific person in an agency or institution" (Maloney & Associates, 2003, p. 4).

Appalachian culture is predominantly patriarchal in its socialization process. Research by Polansky, Borgman, and DeSaix (1972) found that mothers tend to spoil their sons, probably in an effort to keep them within the family. Traditional gender roles are valued and supported (Engelhardt, 2004; Fiene, 2002; Walker, 2000).

Education is valued, but not at the expense of the family. If a father dies, and the children are of an age to contribute to the family income, that is their first responsibility and role. Because the family comes first, education may need to be suspended or abandoned. The family is also the first choice for advice on vocations (Fisher, 1993).

Table 1 summarizes the major common cultural values held by people of Appalachia and their impact on career issues. Basic elements of Appalachian culture reviewed earlier include strong family, kinship, church, and community ties; high value on equality, independence, distrust of outsiders, oral tradition, and patriarchal socialization with traditional gender roles; and a preference for family responsibilities when in conflict with other values, such as education. These characteristics should be taken into consideration when career counselors work with clients who share these Appalachian values.

Appalachians' mistrust of outsiders and strong family connectedness present a challenge for career counseling (Tang & Russ, 2004). The traditional career development theories focus on self-awareness and self-exploration (Leong & Barak, 2001), the identification of personal traits and environmental demands, and the correspondence between person and environment with less attention to the dynamic interaction between individuals and context (Cook, Heppner, & O'Brien, 2002). For people of Appalachian culture, career pursuit focusing on only individual goals and interests may not be acceptable because family benefits surpass individual interests. Facilitating change may be perceived negatively or as destructive to family and community cohesion. Therefore, a potentially effective career counseling approach with people of Appalachia needs to consider both the individual and contextual factors, particularly the dynamic interaction between the person with his or her environment. An effective approach also needs to address the unique challenges people of Appalachia face in pursuing a career. In the current literature, social cognitive career development (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994) and ecological counseling (Conyne & Cook, 2004) are two theories that emphasize the importance of contextual influence on one's functioning and present great potential to be useful in working with people of Appalachia.

Theories Focusing on Person-Environment Interaction

Social Cognitive Career Theory

Derived from Bandura's (1986) social cognitive learning theory, which predicts the general effects of self-efficacy on behavior, Lent et al.'s (1994) social cognitive career theory (SCCT) carries forward the idea of self-efficacy's specific effect on career behavior.

Bandura (1986), in his social cognitive model, said that learning is not just formal education; rather, individuals also learn by trying out behaviors (performance), watching others, and modeling their behavior. They are often conditioned to display certain behaviors by what responses they receive from their environment (Barlow & Durand, 2002). He advocated that the strongest or best learning is by doing or trying the behavior and seeing the results. Bandura (1982) posited a reciprocal relationship between personal attributes, external environmental factors, and overt behavior. An underlying premise of social cognitive theory is that people are active partners in guiding their own motivation and behavior. It is a dynamic theory in that it proposes that people are constantly changing behavior as their environmental needs change.

Bandura (1986) found that people with a positive sense of control, combined with a generally optimistic outlook about the future, coped better with stresses and challenges; in other words, they exhibited high self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as the self-perceived judgment one has about his or her ability to accomplish certain tasks (Bandura, 1986). Bandura (1986) also theorized that self-efficacy beliefs are influenced by performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and emotional arousal. Self-efficacy both influences performance and is influenced by it. It interacts with motivation, personal capabilities, and environmental factors or contextual variables.

Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory has been researched for many psychological traits and behaviors and offers a solid foundation for research and expansion to career development theory (Betz, 1993; Betz & Hackett, 1981, 1986; Lent et al., 1994; Lent & Hackett, 1987). Lent et al.'s (1994) SCCT is presented as a social cognitive framework for understanding career interest, choice, and performance processes. Lent, Brown, and Hackett (2000) focused on cognitive-person variables used to influence career development, with an emphasis on contextual variables that affect the individual. Some of these individual and contextual variables are gender, race, ethnicity, genetic inheritance, socioeconomic status, cultural background, family affordance, and economic situation (Lent & Brown, 1996; Lent et al., 2000).

Self-efficacy plays a major mediating role between interest development, career choice, and individuals' personal and contextual variables. SCCT attempts to consolidate all of the variables that affect career development by suggesting common pathways that are used by these diverse factors. One of the great strengths of SCCT is the recognition of contextual influence on one's career development and the role of self-efficacy in mediating one's behavior while pursuing a career.

Research supports the application of SCCT to minority groups such as Asian Americans (Tang, Fouad, & Smith, 1999), Hispanic Americans (Flores & O'Brien, 2002), and Black college students (Gainor & Lent, 1998), as well as to career entry indexes (range of perceived options, academic achievement, and persistence), work adjustment outcomes (performance), vocational interests, and career choices (Lent et al., 2003; Rivera, 2002; Rottinghaus, Lindley, Green, & Borgen, 2002; Turner & Lapan, 2002). SCCT is almost uniquely qualified as a career theory to specifically explore how personal environment and cultural beliefs affect career choices. It supports the idea, among others, that self-efficacy has a strong role in mediating personal background and interest development and, ultimately, career choice and persistence, with an emphasis on contextual variables that affect the individual (Lent, Brown, & Larkin, 1984). SCCT has plausibility in working with people of Appalachian culture because of its emphasis on contextual support and barriers to individuals' development of self-efficacy in their pursuit of a career.

Ecological Counseling Approach

Ecological counseling, which may not be as familiar as SCCT in the career field, can be defined as "contextualized help-giving that is dependent on the meaning clients derive from their environmental interactions, yielding an improved ecological concordance" (Conyne & Cook, 2004, p. viii). This perspective is partially based on Kurt Lewin's (1936) paradigm that all behavior is a function of the person interacting with the environment, that is, b = f(P x E). Bronfenbrenner (1979) carried this forward with his systems theory. He saw people as existing in overlapping and interacting systems in their environment. Beginning with the microsystem, the immediate or primary ecosystem that includes the family, neighborhood, classroom, work, or religious setting, he continued with the mesosystem, where two microsystems interact, such as family and school or home and work. The exosystem is the environment of external networks such as the workplace, medical institutions, or the school system. The next layer is the macrosystem, or larger cultural context, which provides cultural values, economic patterns, political philosophies, and social conditions (Kasambira & Edwards, 2000; Maton, 2000). The goal of ecological counseling is to help clients find concordance, or positive accommodation, between themselves and their environment, which includes all of these levels (Conyne & Cook, 2004).

When discussing ecological counseling, Conyne (1985) argued that for too many years counselors have tried to fit people to their environment, rather than trying to fit the environment to people. Environment includes not only the intrapsychic, but the social, physical, political, economic, and cultural aspects of people's lives. Trickett (1997) defined the ecological perspective as "the importance of understanding behavior in sociocultural context and as influenced by multiple levels of the ecological environment" (p. 198). Several essential rules in the ecological counseling approach emphasize the importance of sustainability of any intervention; that is, an intervention strategy's positive outcome should go beyond the office and should be sustained in the client's real-life situation (Cook, Conyne, Savageau, & Tang, 2004). In order to achieve sustainability, it is critical to take advantage of the individual's assets in the ecosystem and work with clients to use these resources to deal with barriers.

Cook et al. (2002) applied the ecological counseling approach to conceptualize women's career development and proposed that career development is liable to dynamic factors in one's ecosystem. The goal of career intervention is to shape optimal person-environment interactions and to increase the abilities of individuals to cope with barriers in the system. Cook, Heppner, and O'Brien (2005) also said that each level of the ecosystem has impacts on the individual in defining or reinforcing certain career choices and decision-making behaviors.

These two reviewed theories have made significant contributions toward regaining the tradition of counseling--a focus on facilitating positive behaviors and on career development--by emphasizing the concordance between person and environment. SCCT stresses the importance of individuals as change agents themselves via self-efficacy. The dynamic interaction individuals have with their various life spaces becomes the assertion of ecological counseling. Both theories provide a valuable theoretical framework for the development of the intervention model for working with people of Appalachia. The proposed model described in the following section combines the principles of each model to aim at providing a work model that career counselors can use to help people of Appalachian culture.

Career Intervention Model for People of Appalachia

The Career Intervention Model for People of Appalachian Culture (CIMPAC; see Figure 1) integrates SCCT and the Ecological Counseling model because each approach has distinctive features that complement one another to provide appropriate career interventions with people of Appalachia. The proposed model describes the ways that both models' principles can be put into intervention guidelines for working with people of Appalachian culture. The uniqueness of CIMPAC is its emphasis on making an effort to apply an understanding of culture to assess the ecosystem of individuals. The purpose of assessing the ecosystem is to identify resources/assets and barriers in order to optimize the individual environmental concordance. However, the definition of resources and assets may not be the same for counselors and clients because of their differing cultural backgrounds; therefore, understanding the cultural milieu and values becomes critical for ecosystem assessment to determine what constitutes resources and barriers. This model also stresses the importance of gaining clients' trust in order to have a working alliance because people of Appalachia do not trust outsiders and prefer to seek help from family and community members. Having a trusting relationship is needed in any type of counseling, but it is particularly important for counselors working with people of Appalachian culture because they have a long-held tradition of distrusting outsiders or institutions.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Self-efficacy's mediating function has been extensively supported in the research about SCCT (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2002). Helping individuals develop career self-efficacy that will enable them to pursue and persist in their career aspirations, then, becomes the threshold for career development interventions; whether a person would engage and persist in career exploration depends largely on their self-efficacy. To facilitate development of self-efficacy, the intervention strategies need to consider these factors that are postulated by SCCT as important for self-efficacy: personal traits and contextual affordance, including family background and educational/training opportunities. Career counselors should help individuals develop self-efficacy by using the resources and reducing the barriers in the ecosystem. Again, cultural knowledge and accurate understanding of the individual's ecosystem will help the intervention be on target and provide sustainability. Also, only with strong self-efficacy would an individual show persistence in task approach and be able to overcome difficulties. The resources existing for people of Appalachia are their family members, community, and church because these are considered trustworthy, unlike institutions and outside experts whom they fear will take their children away from the community.

Five principles summarize the major positions of CIMPAC and explain the application of the conceptual intervention model for working with people of Appalachian in career development. A case analysis is presented for discussion.

1. It is essential to gain trust (to be viewed and accepted as an insider vs. an outsider or institutional representative) prior to starting any intervention strategies for career development with people of Appalachia. Gaining trust is also the goal of building a working alliance with them.

2. To work effectively with people of Appalachia, career counselors need to assess the resources and barriers in the individual's ecosystem. Cultural knowledge and awareness are important tools to assist accurate ecosystem assessment, because what is perceived as assets might be regarded differently when viewed from other cultural backgrounds.

3. Facilitating career self-efficacy, operationally defined as perceived confidence to engage in career exploration activities to pursue the chosen career choice, is the primary task of career intervention. Increasing self-efficacy, the belief that an individual is able to accomplish a particular task or goal, will help to make the individual more capable of changing the adverse factors originally in his or her system. Thus, the process is reciprocal.

4. To facilitate career self-efficacy for people of Appalachia, career counselors need to consider the impact of personal attributes, educational/training opportunities, and family background that contribute to individuals' self-efficacy. Resources in the ecosystem should be fully used to counterbalance the barriers inhibiting career pursuit.

5. Following the self-efficacy development, goal setting and implementation of choices should be the main task of career intervention. Family and community resources should be incorporated into goal identification and intervention strategy implementation for a sustained outcome.

Case Scenario

Tammi, a 17-year-old high school senior who was born with a mild form of cerebral palsy, grew up in a small town close to a larger Appalachian metropolitan area. Her father graduated from high school and works as a mechanic in a local car dealership. Her mother never finished high school and has stayed home most of her life, although she has occasionally worked seasonal jobs. Tammi has three younger siblings who share bedrooms in their cramped home. Her grades are above average, and she did well on the Scholastic Assessment Test. She enjoyed her psychology class and would like to study psychology in college but is not sure what kind of positions she could find after graduation. Her school counselor did encourage her to apply to a state university in the nearby city, but the counselor was so busy that Tammi was unable to obtain more specific assistance. The school counselor also told her she would have to leave home and stay on campus, because the distance between the university and her home was too great to commute daily. Tammi knows it is not financially possible for her parents to support her attendance at college. Her parents would like for her to marry as soon as possible and see her future role as being a dutiful wife and mother. Tammi is also very concerned that her physical condition could be an obstacle to college. She feels pulled in two different directions. She has discussed her struggle with fellow church members, and they have provided her with encouragement and support.

An analysis of Tammi's ecosystem reveals the following information: Tammi has some barriers (impaired physical condition [microsystem], lack of parental understanding and support [mesosystem], lack of school support [mesosystem], general perception of gender roles [macrosystem]) and some resources (good academic performance [microsystem], church members and their support [mesosystem; Principle 2]). A good starting point of intervention is probably the mesosystem, because there are both assets and barriers at this level. For counselors (an outsider) to gain trust, two major tasks need to be accomplished here: understanding gender roles and expectations in Tammi's family and collaborating with church members (Principle 1).

The intervention strategies need to take advantage of the various resources in her ecosystem, including her family, church, and school (even if the school counselor is busy, he or she is still an available resource). The supportive church members could talk to the parents, rather than having the girl or counselor talk to them, thus using a resource (respect for and involvement with church) that the girl and her parents have and, at the same time, showing respect for the family's cultural values (Principles 1 and 5). This plan, therefore, would have a better chance of gaining the parents' approval than simply supplying information to the girl and expecting her to carry forward the argument. The counselor could focus on finding out financial aid sources, transportation, or housing solutions; helping the girl decide on a major (saving time and money by having a major decided, rather than being undeclared); supplying specific information regarding the cost of college, distance from home, and outcome of her college attendance for the family; and addressing the benefits and drawbacks to the family of allowing their daughter to go to college (Principles 3, 4, and 5).

Tammi probably has fairly high academic self-efficacy, because she has so far succeeded well in school (Principle 3). Attention should be directed to insecurities about her medical condition and how this might interfere with higher level learning. If she has traditional gender role beliefs, the counselor could work with her as to how she might initiate a change in her beliefs about feminine abilities and overcome this barrier to accomplish her goals (Principle 4). It is important to work with her beliefs about gender roles and her relationship with her parents rather than simply encouraging her to become independent (Principles 1 and 4). In order to facilitate Tammi's career self-efficacy, that is, her self-confidence to engage in career exploration activities and to pursue her career goals, the counselor can build on her strong self-efficacy in academics and provide her the opportunity to observe other women in various career paths. Role models, although not necessarily readily available, are the best way to help Tammi and individuals like her to develop strong self-efficacy. A field trip to the college campus and to work settings where psychology major graduates work would help Tammi understand better what career options she has if she goes to college as a declared psychology major (Principle 5).

In summary, using the existing resources to minimize barriers and facilitate self-efficacy in pursuing a career is the central feature of CIMPAC. Gaining trust is a necessity to work with members of the Appalachian culture before counselors can implement any career intervention programs. CIMPAC can be used as a framework to plan the course of action to work with people of Appalachia.

References

Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, Subtitle IV--Appalachian Regional Development, 40 U.S.C. [section] 14101 et seq. (1965). (Available from Appalachian Regional Development Web site, http://www.arc.gov)

Bailey, R. J. (1997). I never thought of my life as history: A story of the hillbilly exodus and the price of assimilation. Journal of Appalachian Studies, 3, 231-242.

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Barlow, D. H., & Durand, V. M. (2002). Abnormal psychology: An integrative approach (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Berry, C. (2000). Southern White migration to the Midwest, an overview. In P. J. Obermiller, T. E. Wagner, & B. Tucker (Eds.), Appalachian odyssey: Historical perspective on the great migration (pp. 3-26). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Betz, N. E. (1993). Counseling uses of career self-efficacy theory. The Career Development Quarterly, 41, 22-26.

Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 399-410.

Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1986). Applications of self-efficacy theory to understanding career choice behavior. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4, 279-289.

Borman, K. M., & Obermiller, P. J. (1994). Introduction. In K. M. Borman & P. J. Obermiller (Eds.), From mountain to metropolis: Appalachian migrants in American cities (pp. xvii-xxi). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Breckinridge, M. (1972). Wide neighborhood: A story of the Frontier Nursing Service. New York: Harper.

Brewer, E. D. C. (1962). Religion and the churches. In T. R. Ford (Ed.), The Southern Appalachian region (pp. 201-218). Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Caudill, H. M. (1963). Night comes to the Cumberlands: A biography of a depressed area. Boston: Little, Brown.

Conyne, R. K. (1985). The counseling ecologist: Helping people and environments. Counseling and Human Development, 18, 239-250.

Conyne, R. K., & Cook, E. P. (Eds.). (2004). Ecological counseling: An innovative approach to conceptualizing person-environment interaction. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Cook, E. P., Conyne, R. K., Savageau, C., & Tang, M. (2004). The process of ecological counseling. In R. K. Conyne & E. P. Cook (Eds.), Ecological counseling: An innovative approach to conceptualizing person-environment interaction (pp. 109-140). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Cook, E., Heppner, M. J., & O'Brien, K M. (2002). Career development of women of color and White women: Assumptions, conceptualization, and interventions from an ecological perspective. The Career Development Quarterly, 50, 291-305.

Cook, E., Heppner, M. J., & O'Brien, K. M. (2005). Multicultural and gender influences in women's career development: An ecological perspective. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 33, 165-179.

Couto, R. A. (2002). Appalachia. In P. J. Obermiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 3-14). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Crotty, T. (n.d.). Who were (are) the Celts? Retrieved May 29, 2004, from http://www.leyline.org/cra/celts.html

Drake, R. B. (2001). A history of Appalachia. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.

Duggan, B. J. (2002). The eastern Cherokees in Southern Appalachia: Principal people, persistent people. In P. J. Obermiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 45-56). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Engelhardt, E. S. D. (Ed.). (2004). Beyond hill and hollow: Original readings in Appalachian women's studies. Athens: Ohio University Press.

Fiene, J. I. (2002). Gender, class and self-image. In P. J. Obemiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 71-79). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Fisher, S. L. (Ed.). (1993). Fighting back in Appalachia: Traditions of resistance and change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Flores, L. Y., & O'Brien, K. M. (2002). The career development of Mexican American adolescent women: A test of social cognitive career theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 14-27.

Gainor, K. A., & Lent, R. W. (1998). Social cognitive expectations and racial identity attitudes in predicting the math choice intentions of Black college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 403-413.

Hartigan, J., Jr. (1997). Name calling: Objectifying "poor Whites" and "White trash" in Detroit. In M. Wray & A. Newitz (Eds.), White trash: Race and class in America (pp. 41-56). New York: Routledge.

Hobbs, S. D. (1998). Foreword. In C. E. Feather (Ed.), Mountain people in a flat land: A popular history of Appalachian migration to northeast Ohio, 1940-1965 (pp. xii-xxiv). Athens: Ohio University Press.

Jones, P. S. (2002). Dialect as a deterrent to cultural stripping: Why Appalachian migrants continue to talk that talk. In P. J. Obermiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 151-154). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Kasambira, K. P., & Edwards, L. (2000, June). Counseling and human ecology: A conceptual framework for counselor educators. Paper presented at the eighth International Counseling Conference, San Jose, Costa Rica.

Knight, C. E., Poteete, S., Sparrow, A., & Wrye, J. D. (2003). Practicing sociology in Appalachia: Interview with Dwight Billings. Appalachian Journal: A Regional Studies Review, 30, 164-180.

Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (1996). Social cognitive approach to career development: An overview. The Career Development Quarterly, 44, 310-321.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance [Monograph]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79-122.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 36-49.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Associates, Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 255-311). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 356-362.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Schmidt, J., Brenner, B., Lyons, H., & Treistman, D. (2003). Relation of contextual supports and barriers to choice behavior in engineering majors: Test of alternative social cognitive models. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 458-465.

Lent, R. W., & Hackett, G. (1987). Career self-efficacy: Empirical status and future directions [Monograph]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30, 347-382.

Leong, F. T. L., & Barak, A. (2001). Contemporary models in vocational psychology: A volume in honor of Samuel H. Osipow. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lewis, R. L. (2002). Beyond isolation and homogeneity: Diversity and the history of Appalachia. In P. J. Obermiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 122-135). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Little, A. (2002). The politics of community: Theory and practice. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.

Maloney, M. E. (1993). Who are Appalachians? In D. L. Tribe (Ed.), Appalachian cultural awareness in Ohio: Implications for educators and service providers (pp. 57-63). Jackson: Ohio State University Extension, South District.

Maloney, M. (2006, January). Preliminary report on reasons for Appalachian non-migration. Paper presented at the meeting of the Urban Appalachian Council Research Committee, Cincinnati, OH.

Maloney, M., & Associates. (2003). Working with the Appalachian Family Workshop. St. Martin, OH: Catholic Social Services, Chatfield College Office.

Maloney, M. E., & Auffrey, C. (2004). The social areas of Cincinnati: An analysis of social needs (4th ed.). Retrieved March 2, 2005, from http://www.socialareasofcincinnati.org/files/SocialAreasOfCincinnati2004.pdf

Maton, K. (2000). Making a difference: The social ecology of social transformation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 25-57.

Obermiller, P. (1999). Paving the way: Urban organizations and the image of Appalachians. In D. B. Billings, G. Norman, & K. Ledford (Eds.), Confronting Appalachian stereotypes: Back talk from an American region (pp. 251-266). Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.

Obermiller, P. J., & Howe, S. R (2002). New paths and patterns of Appalachian migration. In P. J. Obermiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 89-97). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Obermiller, P. J., & Maloney, M. E. (1994). Living city, feeling country: The current status and future prospects of urban Appalachians. In K. M. Borman & P. J. Obermiller (Eds.), From mountain to metropolis: Appalachian migrants in American cities (pp. 2-12). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Obermiller, P. J., & Maloney, M. E. (2002). "We ain't agoin' back": A retrospective look at urban Appalachians in greater Cincinnati. In P. J. Obermiller & M. E. Maloney (Eds.), Appalachia: Social context past and present (4th ed., pp. 98-103). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Payne, R. K. (1996). A framework for understanding poverty. Highlands, TX: aha! Process.

Polansky, N. A., Borgman, R. A., & DeSaix, C. (1972). Roots of futility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Prajznerova, K. (2003). Cultural intermarriage in Southern Appalachia: Cherokee elements in four selected novels by Lee Smith. New York: Routledge.

Rivera, L. M. (2002). Relations of perceived barriers, acculturation, and role models to the career self-efficacy and career considerations of Hispanic women. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(6-B), 3021.

Rottinghaus, P., Lindley, L. D., Green, A., & Borgen, F. H. (2002). Educational aspirations: The contribution of personality, self-efficacy, and interests. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 1-19.

Tang, M., Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (1999). Asian Americans' career choices: A path model to examine factors influencing their career choices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 142-157.

Tang, M., & Russ, K. (2004, April). Cultural and contextual accommodation: Career development issues and interventions for minority groups. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Counseling Association, Kansas City, MO.

Trickett, E. J. (1997). Ecology and primary prevention: Reflections on a meta-analysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 197-205.

Turner, S., & Lapan, R. T. (2002). Career self-efficacy and perceptions of parent support in adolescent career development. The Career Development Quarterly, 51, 44-55.

Wagner, T. E., Obermiller, P. J., & Turner, W. H. (2004). African American miners and migrants: The Eastern Kentucky Social Club. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Walker, M. (2000). All we knew was to farm: Rural women in the upcountry South, 1919-1941. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Welch, J. B. (1999). Uneven ground: Cultural values, moral standards, and religiosity in the heart of Appalachia. In B. J. Leonard (Ed.), Christianity in Appalachia: Profiles in regional pluralism (pp. 52-72). Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.

Wilkinson, C. E. (1999). On being "country": One Affrilachian woman's return home. In D. B. Billings, G. Norman, & K Ledford (Eds.), Confronting Appalachian stereotypes: Back talk from an American region (pp. 184-187). Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.

Wilson, S. D. (1983). The adjustment process of Southern Appalachian Whites in Cincinnati, 1940-1979. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Kentucky, Lexington.

Woodrum, A. (2004). State-mandated testing and cultural resistance in Appalachian schools: Competing values and expectations. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 19, 1-10.

Mei Tang and Kathryn Russ, Counseling Program, University of Cincinnati. Kathryn Russ is now at School of Professional Counseling, Lindsey Wilson College. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mei Tang, Division of Human Services, College of Education, Criminal Justice and Human Services, ML 0002, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0002 (e-mail: mei.tang@uc.edu).

TABLE 1 Appalachian Cultural Values and Impacts on Career Issues

Appalachian Cultural Factor             Impact on Career Development

Distrust of outsiders and institutions  Limited exposure to career
                                          options
Strong family and kinship ties          Open to family influences for
                                          job placement; more likely to
                                          follow in relatives' footsteps
                                          (limits options)
Strong church and community ties        Dislike of leaving community,
                                          thus restricting career
                                          possibilities; often won't
                                          take job of which church does
                                          not approve
Patriarchal socialization               Increased interest in gender-
                                          specific career choices;
                                          decreased interest and
                                          knowledge of "other" gender
                                          career options
Oral tradition                          Preference for oral over written
                                          information
Strong values for equality and          Prefer jobs where skills
  independence                            respected; do not like to be
                                          "beholden" to other than
                                          family/kin for career help;
                                          want some control over job
                                          responsibilities and tasks
Preference for the concrete             Students benefit more from
                                          exposure to job sites rather
                                          than reading or hearing about
                                          careers
Family responsibilities over            May leave school if family
  educational values                      responsibilities intervene and
                                          their earnings are needed