A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

The Emergence of Tech-Prep at the State and Local Levels - 1995

Coordinators' Observations On The Progress Of Tech-Prep

Consortium coordinators' perceptions of progress in Tech-Prep implementation serve as a context to the discussions in previous chapters of interpretations of Tech-Prep development. Their perceptions of the major barriers to implementation and the successful features of Tech-Prep may help to identify issues that can be addressed by state or federal policy. In the national survey, coordinators were asked to cite the factors that had presented the greatest obstacles to or problems in the planning and implementation of Tech-Prep within their consortia. They also were asked to report on the aspects of Tech-Prep that had been most successful in their consortium.

The most common obstacles are insufficient resources and negative attitudes toward vocational education

The most pervasive problems facing Tech-Prep programs are funding and attitudes. Negative attitudes toward vocational education and/or Tech-Prep and a lack of staff, time, and money for Tech-Prep at the secondary level were most frequently cited as serious problems--by more than two-thirds of consortium coordinators (Figure X.2).3 Older and newer grantees were equally likely to report resources as a barrier. Older grantees were slightly more likely to cite negative attitudes as an obstacle to implementation.

Implementation of Tech-Prep at the secondary level is frequently undermined by the lack of an integrated curriculum, a priority for Tech-Prep course scheduling, or a clear definition of Tech-Prep participation

Consortia continue to have difficulty integrating vocational and academic education to create programs of study for Tech-Prep students. Almost 60 percent of the consortia reported in fall 1993 that the lack of a truly integrated curriculum is a major obstacle to Tech-Prep implementation (Figure X.2). Undoubtedly contributing to this difficulty are such factors as insufficient collaboration between vocational and academic educators and difficulties in defining and revising curricula (cited as a barrier by 37 percent and 44 percent of coordinators, respectively). 

                              FIGURE X.2              Reported Obstacles Or Problems In Planning And                        Implementing Tech-Prep                       (Percentage of Consortia)     OBSTACLES OR BARRIERS        Negative Attitudes ============================> 62%                          ---------------> 34%  Resistance of Vocational ===============> 35%                Educators ---------> 22%    Resistance of Secondary ==================> 39%                  Schools        Difficulty Revising =====================> 44%               Curriculum -------------> 31%    Difficulty Negotiating ======> 14%  Articulation Agreements --------> 19%          No Definition of ===================> 43%            Participation ---------->23%        Lack of Integrated ==========================>58%               Curriculum -----------------> 38%    Lack of Administrative ===============> 32%                  Support ------> 17%       Poor Secondary/Post =================> 38%  Secondary Collaboration ----------------> 35%  Poor Vocational/Academic =================> 37%            Collaboration -------------> 28%  Lack of Staff/Time/Money ================================> 71%                          ------------------------> 55%         Lack of Business/ ============> 25%     Industry Involvement --------> 19%          Class Scheduling =====================> 46%                 Problems -------> 17%         Problems Defining ============> 25%                Objectives -------> 16%                          +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+                          0        20       40       60       80      100                                          PERCENT OF CONSORTIA                  ====> Secondary Level     ----> Postsecondary Level

Class scheduling conflicts also affect student participation in programs of study. To implement a sequence of related, integrated academic and vocational courses, class schedules must be configured so that students can actually enroll in the relevant courses. However, almost half of consortium coordinators cited class scheduling constraints or conflicts as a significant barrier to Tech-Prep implementation (Figure X.2). The lack of priority given to resolving scheduling issues was also observed to be an implementation problem in some of the in-depth study sites. Some of these scheduling difficulties probably reflect the newness of the program and a lack of full support for Tech-Prep by school administrators. Cost might also be a factor. Administrators who might be willing to offer a vocational course to a limited number of enrollees might be reluctant to set aside or schedule special academic courses for these few students, because such a "program" may not be cost effective.

Arranging course schedules is a major factor in implementing a definition for Tech-Prep participation. Definitions of which students are to be considered "in Tech-Prep" are often based on enrollment in certain classes. Therefore, if the courses are not offered in a schedule that enables students to participate in them, the definition is difficult to apply.

Defining Tech-Prep participation continues to challenge many consortia. More than 40 percent of the coordinators (from 299 consortia) reported that the lack of a definition for participation was one of the greatest obstacles to implementing Tech-Prep in their consortia. Thirty-one of these consortia reportedly already had established and were using a definition to report the number of Tech-Prep students but were apparently dissatisfied with their current definitions. Older grantees were even more likely than newer ones to report the lack of definition as a barrier, probably because these consortia are closer to serving students or are already doing so. Consequently, their need to determine which students should be considered "in Tech-Prep" is more immediate.

The greatest barriers to Tech-Prep are at the secondary level

Although efforts of both the secondary consortium members and postsecondary consortium members are important in Tech-Prep implementation, more consortia face obstacles at the secondary level than at the postsecondary level (Figure X.2). This imbalance probably reflects the greater need for change and the current concentration of Tech-Prep activity in high schools rather than in community colleges. As discussed in Chapter VII, most new Tech-Prep curricula are being implemented at the secondary level. Postsecondary faculty may have participated heavily in the development of these curricula, but secondary teachers are likely to bear the brunt of the implementation efforts. Moreover, because Tech-Prep students have advanced to the postsecondary level in only a few consortia, few postsecondary faculty have already faced the need to institute curriculum changes.

Consortia are relatively satisfied with the level of business and industry involvement in Tech-Prep

Most consortia receive some support from business, industry, and labor groups and are generally happy with it. Relatively few consortia reported a lack of business and industry involvement in Tech-Prep as an obstacle to implementation (Figure X.2). In fact, coordinators of nearly half the consortia reported that obtaining this involvement was one of the successes of Tech-Prep implementation (Figure X.3). Of the 177 consortia that cited insufficient business and industry involvement as a major barrier, 53 (30 percent) lacked any support from these groups. The remaining 70 percent of the 177 consortia appear to be dissatisfied with the current level or type of support.

The Tech-Prep Education Act did not specify roles for business, industry, and labor, and, to date, these groups generally have contributed fairly low-level support (see Chapter III). During the next several years, increasing numbers of consortia may attempt to make workplace experiences a more routine part of Tech-Prep. If they succeed in doing so, demands on the private sector could increase, and satisfaction with its involvement may change.

Articulation is considered a successful component of Tech-Prep implementation

Development of articulation agreements is a major activity of Tech-Prep consortia, and one that most coordinators view with satisfaction. Almost three-fourths of the consortia had signed new articulation agreements within the two years preceding the survey. Very few reported difficulties in negotiating these agreements as a serious problem (Figure X.2). In fact, almost 70 percent of the consortia cited development of articulation agreements as one of the most successful aspects of Tech-Prep implementation (Figure X.3). 

                                 FIGURE X.3        Aspects Of Tech-Prep Considered Most Success At The Secondary                         And Postsecondary Levels  SUCCESSFUL ASPECTS   Administrative Support ====================================> 78%                         ----------------------------------> 72%  Secondary/Postsecondary ======================> 51%           Collaboration ----------------------> 49%      Academic/Vocational ===================================> 75%           Collaboration ----------------------> 50%       Defined Guidelines ========================> 56%                         ------------------> 41%        Business/Industry ======================> 50%                 Support --------------------> 45%         Increased Public ==============================> 66%               Awareness ----------------------> 49%    Integrating Tech-Prep =======================> 51%            into Reforms -------------> 28%      State Level Support ====================> 46%                         -----------------> 38%             Articulation ===============================>69%                         -----------------------------> 64%                         +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+                         0        20       40       60       80       100                                         PERCENT OF CONSORTIA                      ===> Secondary     ---> Postsecondary  SOURCE: Inventory of Local Tech-Prep Planning and Implementation, Fall 1993

Perhaps one reason articulation has proved to be less daunting than other components of the Tech-Prep model is that many consortia are building on previous experiences in this area. Secondary and postsecondary institutions in nearly 60 percent of the consortia had signed articulation agreements before the Tech-Prep consortium was established. Consortia without a track record of articulation were more likely to consider developing these agreements to be a barrier to implementation.

Building collaboration and support among educational partners is viewed as a major accomplishment

Virtually all of the reforms promoted by Tech-Prep--including curriculum integration, articulation, and programs of study--require consortium members to work together effectively. Despite some implementation problems, coordinators generally considered this collaboration to be an important accomplishment of their Tech-Prep initiatives. More than three-fourths of consortia coordinators consider administrative support for Tech-Prep to be a successful feature of their Tech-Prep planning and implementation efforts (Figure X.3). More than three-fourths also reported collaboration between secondary and postsecondary educators as a successful feature.

Consortium coordinators perceive progress in building close working relationships among partners, but many still see a need for substantial improvement. Although many consortium coordinators reported that collaboration was one of the most successful aspects of Tech-Prep, a significant number also reported that relationships among partners were a barrier to implementation. In 30 to 40 percent of consortia, vocational educators' resistance to change, lack of local administrator support, and lack of collaboration between secondary and postsecondary educators or between vocational and academic educators were major implementation problems (Figure X.2).

Local implementation is often positively affected by state-level support

Technical assistance and other support from state agencies can facilitate the pace of and approaches to implementation at the consortium level. Nearly half of the consortium coordinators reported that a high degree of state-level involvement in and support of Tech-Prep was one of the most successful aspects of their consortium efforts (Figure X.3). The extent of consortia satisfaction with state efforts varied by state. In 18 states, more than half of the consortia reported that state-level support and involvement was a very important factor in implementation progress.

3 Based on information from visits to in-depth study sites, it appears that "negative attitudes" about vocational education are encountered among parents, students, and academic teachers and counselors--although certainly to a degree that varies from one locale to another.


-###-

[Tech-Prep Data Collection And Analysis] [Table of Contents] [References]