Dr. Belinda Howard (Australia) has recently addressed the maze of language, descriptors, and phrases that accompany career guidance in education, employment, and social inclusion policies in Australia at state, territories, and federal level. These descriptors included pathways, transitions, career development and career education, used almost interchangeably. Each state and territory framed career guidance differently according to overarching policy themes such workforce development, student wellbeing, equity/inclusion, employability.  At federal level, transferable skills and career management and navigation skills appeared in the National Career Education Strategy (2019). Her article begs the questions: how does terminology for career guidance develop/evolve within countries and between countries? Which are local, regional, national and international influences? The OECD in the past 10 years has been promoting the concept of career readiness. I am sure that many readers will have seen these terms appear in their national or regional discourses on career guidance, as if the OECD is ‘the’ source. Likewise the terms ‘career guidance’,  ‘career development’, and ‘career maturity’ have emanated in the last century from USA academic sources, and the European Union has promoted the term ‘lifelong guidance’ since the Council of Education Ministers Resolution of 2004. These concepts may fit in some societies and economies. ‘Livelihood planning’ may be a better choice for other societies and economies. Translations of career concepts and terminology into other societies and cultures, even the word ‘career’, are never as easy as they look.

Language is time-bound and culture-bound. Developing a common linguistic understanding of ‘lifelong guidance’ was a huge challenge for the 31 countries that formed part of the European Lifelong Guidance Policy Network (ELGPN) leading to the development and publication of an EU policy glossary in 2014. Traditionally, such glossaries have been the purview of professional associations for academic research and exchange. But glossaries and definitions are particularly important for national and regional education and employment policy documents, because as Dr Howard points out, words have consequences and create expectations. Without concrete definitions of career terminology in policy documents, the public can be short-changed. Attention also needs to be paid to policy terminology used to cloak or express changes in government policies. A new government/minister will use language to show how different/better they treat career guidance than the previous government/minister. It’s a policy marketing issue, not an academic study of differences.

And finally a word about the language of political rhetoric for career guidance. Such rhetoric is very popular when it comes to election times and party manifestos in countries where elections are held. But once elected, the reality is different as evidenced by recent experience in the UK.

Our thanks to Dr Howard for raising the issue of policy language! I am sure it rings a bell for readers in other countries!