00001.tif

PDF

Download

Open document

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page{s)'\ If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being ‘ p h o tographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 N orth Z e e b R oad Ann A rbor, M ichigan 48106 A X erox E d u catio n C om pany 75-28,628 f GRIMES, John Joseph, 1940- 1 McLEA, Kenneth Richard, 1924- § AN ANALYSIS OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF CAREER 1 EDUCATION SPECIALISTS IN CALIFORNIA AS A I BASIS FOR DETERMINING DEFINITIONAL AND % FEASIBILITY COMPONENTS OF CAREER EDUCATION. | Both authors received degrees at University f of Southern California, Ed.D., 1975 M Education, administration 1 Xerox University Microfilms t Ann Arbor, M ichigan 48106 / f (e) Copyright by KENNETH RICHARD McLEA and JOHN JOSEPH GRIMES 1975 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. AN ANALYSIS OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF CAREER EDUCATION SPECIALISTS IN CALIFORNIA AS A BASIS FOR DETERMINING DEFINITIONAL AND FEASIBILITY COMPONENTS OF CAREER EDUCATION A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education University of Southern California In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education by Kenneth Richard McLea and John Joseph Grimes June 1975 This dissertation, w ritten under the direction of the Chairman of the candidate's Guidance C om m ittee and a pproved by all m embers of the C om m ittee, has been presented to and accepted by the F aculty of the School of Education in partial fulfillm ent of the requirements for the degree of D octor of E ducation. June, 1975 Date. Dean Guidance Committee Chairmai ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many persons and organizations have been involved in the research and development of this project and the dissertation would be incomplete without recognizing their efforts. Persons throughout California and other national figures contributed resource materials and needed data which assisted in bringing our research to a conclusion: the State of California Career Education Task Force for including us in their agenda; Paul Peters* Manager* and Kenneth Densley* Director of Research for the Career Educa tion Task Force; and the many other persons who partici pated in the jury validation and as the study population. Special thanks to Dr. Kenneth Densley and Dr. David Taxis who made available their facilities for meetings and to those national figures who took the time to respond to our requests. Our thanks also is extended to the entire staff of the School of Education for their efforts and encouragement as they brought us along the pathway to becoming doctoral candidates. We wish to express a sincere debt of gratitude to the professors who guided us as our doctoral committee: Dr. Leonard Murdy* Chairman* Dr. William B. Michael, and Dr. Clive Grafton. Mr. Murdy* with his wealth of back- ii ground in administration, untiringly assisted us with sug gestions , counsel, and understanding as we progressed; Dr. William B. Michael guided and assisted in coordinating our writing; and Dr. Clive Grafton with his vibrant enthus iasm assisted in carrying us through to completion. This research project was the culmination of an effort by partners who traveled, studied, worked, and worried together through the two and one-half years of the doctoral program at the University of Southern California. The labor of compiling all of the research materials including the literature and methodology was a team effort. The writing was divided to facilitate a certain amount of individuality in the combined venture: Kenneth R. McLea, because of his background in the administration of Vocational/Industrial Education programs elected to write Chapter I, The Problem, and Chapter II, Review of Litera ture and John J. Grimes, whose chief training is in Vocational Counseling and Administration, prepared Chapter III on Procedure. The writing of the two remaining chapters--Chapter IV, Findings and Chapter V, Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations— was a joint effort. The most important thanks goes to Mrs. McLea, who typed and retyped the drafts to perfection and to our families, for without their patience and sacrifice none of this would have been accomplished. iii CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................... ii LIST OF TABLES .................................... vi Chapter I. THE PROBLEM................................ 1 Introduction Background Basic Difficulty Statement of the Problem Overview or Design and Procedure Assumptions Limitations Delimitations Definitions of Terms II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................... 11 Introduction Need for Career Education Historical Background Career Education--National Outlook Career Education in California Related Studies Future of Career Education Summary III. THE PROCEDURE.............................. 28 Endorsement of the Study Selection of the Jury Development of the Data Gathering Instrument Study Population Collection of the Data Treatment of the Data Summary iv Chapter Page IV. FINDINGS..................................... 44 Introduction The Findings Discussion V. SUMMARYj CONCLUSIONSj AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . 86 Summary Conclusions Recommendations REFERENCES........................................... 92 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES................................. 95 APPENDICES........................................... 99 APPENDIX A. Letter of Endorsement and Other Correspondence with the Cali fornia Education Task Force .... 101 B. Validation Jury Questionnaire and Correspondence............... 109 C. Outline of the Study Problem and a Research Project Data Gathering Instrument ............... 123 D. Letters to Superintendents of Participating School Districts Career Education Interview Release Letters to Study Respondents.......................... 134 v LIST OP TABLES Table Page 1. Analysis of Definition Components or Elements................................ 46 2. Analysis of Feasibility Components or Elements................................ 63 3. Percentages of the 4l Respondents Endors ing Each of Pour Response Alternatives in Each of Eight Broad Areas of Concern Regarding the Feasibility of a School District Entering into a Career Education Program ......................... 79 vi CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction As there is a point beyond which old systems* procedures, and methodologies can be modified without empirical evidence, it is primarily through research and evaluation that a professional educator can determine the needed changes. Because of rapid technological changes, one new task of education is to prepare people for living and working in a dynamic world of the future, a world which no one can yet describe. In a situation characterized by rapid changes in international relations, in material con ditions of living, in the intellectual horizons of much of humankind, and in the understanding of the nature of the physical universe, the imperative need for education is to be found in the determination of those purposes, those value systems, and those behaviors which can be communi cated to youth in the hope that tomorrow's adults can survive the tests of their times. In an attempt to educate nearly 100 percent of the population, change is necessary and inevitable, not neces sarily in what is learned, but in how it is learned, if 1 maximum growth and fulfillment of each person are to be attained. Upon these criteria educators should be expected to build programs, to design facilities, and to reorganize instructional systems in a continuing flexible process based on a sound evaluation plan. Background The greatest desire for a career education philoso phy was brought about by technological changes in industry during the past decade. These changes are increasing the pressure upon industry and as well as upon the nation's professional educational personnel to devise programs which will prepare men and women for entry into the ever dynamic world of work and which also will maintain and modify as necessary existing work skills in light of technological developments. Since gainfully employed persons are impera tive to the nation's prosperity and productivity, career education has become the latest magianism to capture the fancy of pedogogic planners. Introduced in 1971 toy the then U.S. Commissioner of Education, Dr. Sidney P. Marland, Jr., career education was intended to expose students to career awareness, career guidance, and eventually career preparation. The program was formulated to begin in kindergarten and to progress throughout life. Commissioner Marland (1972) defined career educa tion as follows: 3 Career education provides for a broad approach to preparation for citizenship; provides job informa tion and skill development; and also helps individ uals develop attitudes about the personal, psych- logical, social and economic significance of work in our society. It develops and fosters vocational and recreational interests of individuals to help prepare for a well-rounded living in a world in which leisure time is increasing and greater oppor tunity for a self-expression through creative produc tion is available. In his State of the Union Message presented to the 93nd Congress on January 20, 1972.. President Nixon stated that career education is another area of major new emphasis to provide people of all ages with broader exposure to and better preparation for the world of work. He stated: "There is no more disconcerting waste than the waste of human potential." Basic Difficulty Although career education has caught the interest of many educators in the United States, each one has tended to develop a "personalized" definition regarding the role and scope that career education should play in the educa tional system. If the role and scope can be determined through research and evaluation of ongoing programs in career edu cation, then an outcome would be the identification of components or elements which should be included when a definition of career education is planned for a particular district. An additional outcome would be the development of feasibility components for use by school districts to determine whether career education could fulfill the dis trict's role and if so to ascertain what the scope and characteristics of an educational system would need to be if an effective career educational program should be designed. Statement of the Problem The problem of this investigation was formulated in terms of the following questions: Question A What would be the components or elements to be included in a definition of career education? 1. What would be the highly or most desir able components or elements which should be included in a definition of career education? 2. What would be the components or elements considered advisable which would aid in the definition of career education? 3. What components or elements would be considered unnecessary or irrelevant in a definition of career education? 4. What components should be avoided in a definition of career education? 5 Question B What areas of concern must a district investigate to determine the feasibility of entering into a career education program? 1. What areas would be highly or most desir able for a district to investigate in determining the feasibility of enter ing into career education? 2. What areas would be considered advis able for a district to investigate in determining the feasibility of enter ing into career education? 3. What areas would be unnecessary or irrelevant when a district is deter mining the feasibility of entering into career education? 4. What areas should be avoided when a district is determining' the feasibil ity of entering into career education? Overview or Design and Procedure The methodology employed for this study was that of the descriptive survey approach which involved use of per sonal interviews and an instrument for acquisition of data henceforth referred to as the Data Gathering Instrument. The survey included areas in California having career education programs. The following steps in order of their occurrence were undertaken: 1. A review of the professional literature was made in order that the researchers could identify and develop expertise in the field of career educa tion. 2. The Data Gathering Instrument was designed to ascertain which of the aspects in career edu cation could be classified as essential "aspects." 3. The Data Gathering Instrument was administered to the validation jury., consisting of a repre sentative panel of men and women knowledgeable about and interested in career education. 4. Selection of the study population was carefully exercised to protect against bias in the inter viewing procedure. Interviews were conducted with the career education leaders in California to ascertain the essential components or ele ments necessary for a career education defini tion. 5. Specific information was requested and recorded on a Data Gathering Instrument. 6. Information obtained from the career education leaders in conjunction with the career educa tion Data Gathering Instrument developed by the researchers was first summarized statisti cally and then used as a basis for determining definition and feasibility components. Assumptions The following assumptions were basic to the design of this study: 1. A review of the literature would produce basic lists of important requisites for career education programs. 2. A Jury of specialists could identify and scrutinize the most positive aspects of career education. 3. The instrument used was a valid and reli able measure for this type of study. 4. The leaders involved would respond to the interviews and instrument honestly and accurately. 5. The leaders participating in this study supported the concept of career education. Limitations To the extent that any of the assumptions made were not met limitations in the study did exist. In addition the samples used in the study were representative only of the delimited population from which they were sampled. Delimitations The study was delimited to the "leaders" in career education and administrators in selected school districts in California. The study was delimited to career education programs in Grades K through 12 and to areas considered important in a feasibility investigation of career educa tion except finance. Definitions of Terms Awareness. Perception of self, the world of work, workers, leisure time, and resources. Career. An individual's total life experiences. Career development. The continuous process of the self-development over the individual's life span through education, work, and leisure. Career education leaders. Persons who have been selected to direct career education programs in the state of California. Career Education Task Force. A group appointed by the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction and charged with the responsibility of making explicit the meaning of the concept, "Career Education"; of developing career education models and of providing statewide leader 9 ship for the development and expansion of career education in California. Career guidance. Educational programs that promote and encourage life career development in individuals. Career preparation. Vocational education. Competency. A skill that one is able to execute in an effective fashion. Data Gathering Instrument. An instrument employed in the data acquisition procedure. Education. The totality of experiences through which one learns. Essential aspects. Those qualities of career edu cation deemed by the jury of specialists to be absolutely necessary. Jury of specialists. A representative panel of men and women knowledgeable about and interested in fostering career education. Knowledge. Substantive, cognitive content. Leisure. Freedom from required effort with the time used in a self-fulfilling manner at an individual's discretion. Life career development. Self-development over the life span through the integration of the roles, set tings, and events of a person's total life. Occupation. The principal business of one's life. Orientation. Internalization of knowledge; analy sis and consideration of general directions and goals want ing action. Study population. Career education leaders selected by the California Career Education Task Force personnel. Study respondents or interviewees. The members of the State of California Career Education Task Force. The California project directors and/or coordinators of sites whose outstanding programs were accepted by the Task Force and funded under Part C or Part D of the Vocational Educa tion Act, ig68. The project directors and/or coordinators of selected California districts that currently have career education programs. Work. Conscious effort aimed at producing benefits for oneself and/or for oneself and others. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction Much has been written in the area of career educa tion since its inception by Dr. Sidney P. Marland, Jr. in 1971, then United States Commissioner of Education. He stressed vigorously that a new emphasis in education was needed--an emphasis on what he called "Career Education." In conjunction with the national interest aroused by the term, and more specifically with the connotations which the whole concept has brought forward, many questions have been asked and misunderstandings have been raised which seek to be clearly defined. The Implications toward change which are to be expected because of the concept of career education also require a foundation upon which more elaborate discussions and decisions may be based. This study is an attempt to develop a guide in responding to two frequently asked questions pertaining to the definition and the feasibility of career education. As stated by Dr. Robert Worthington, former Commissioner for Adult, Vocational, and Technical Education, U.S. Office of Education: 11 121 The U.S. Office of Education [USOE] certainly has no ambition to blueprint a program, cast it in bronze, and deliver it. The program, if it is to be built, will be built by school personnel across the land. USOE will encourage it and provide money and technical assistance but it will not provide approved solutions. (Worthington, 1973) A review of the literature was conducted as a means of developing a background of information and of surveying the components or elements thus far hui.lt by school person nel nationallyj but particularly in California. Need for Career Education Several individuals have addressed themselves to the need for career education. The citizen of today in every developed country is typically an employee. He works for one of its institutions. He looks to them for his livelihood. He looks to them for his opportunities. He looks to them for access to status and function in society, as well as personal fulfillment and achievement. (Drucker* 1974, P» 4) Technological change has, rather suddenly, thrown up a dramatic challenge to this nation's political, economic, social^ and educational institutions. Unless far more and far better education on the semi- professionalj technical and skilled levels is soon made available to greater numbers of citizens, the national economy and social structure will suffer irreparable damage. (Venn, 1964, p. l) In the late 1960’s and early 1970's, it became apparent that the present educational system in the United States was seriously limited in providing for the needs of the major portion of the student population, both young and adult. Through the USOE it has been observed that the 13 new task of education is to prepare people for living in a world which, because of the rapid changes, no one can fore see, a world in which the ability of a person to work and to survive will depend more and more on education, train ing, and the skills he possesses. The pressing need for career education depends upon the desire and capability to change. In a speech to the California Industrial Education Association, McLea (1973) declared that the American Indus trial Arts Association's definition of career education is a comprehensive educational program to provide for a broad approach to the preparation for citizenship; provide job information and skill development; and help Individuals develop attitudes about personal, psychological, social, and economic significance of work in our society. It develops and fosters avocational and recreational interests of individ uals to help prepare them for well-rounded living in our complex technological society. Career edu cation begins in Kindergarten and continues through the adult years. Probably the most Important characteristic of career education Is to help students develop a per sonal plan for lifelong learning which includes learning about the world we live in, its people and what they do, their life styles; the social and physical environment; learning about sciences, arts, and literature we have inherited and are creating; and learning about the way in which the world's people are interacting. Career education equips students to live their lives as fulfilled Individ uals . The California Career Education Task Force, which is a group appointed by the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction and charged with the responsibility of making explicit the meaning of the concept, "Career 14 Education," has defined career education as an educational thrust designed to (l) Infuse con cepts of career development and preparation into all the learners at all levels; and (2) provide each student with a coordinated educational experi ence consisting of career awareness, career explora tion, career preparation, career guidance, and placement. (1974, p. 10) Both parts of this definition, as do the 21 others located during the review of literature, basically declare the same position--that of describing career education as an "educational method whose goals encompass the highest priority society places on a student: his or her career" (Career education and existing curriculum, 1973j P- 86). Although all of the definitions have made use of a certain number of commonalities such as awareness of, orientation to, or preparation for, the questions to be answered throughout this research are concerned with which of the commonalities (components or elements) are highly or most desirable when defining career education and/or with what characteristics in a career education program would be feasible for a particular locale. Many leaders, locally and nationally, have already recognized career education as a viable concept that will "make education meaningful and purposeful for all Ameri cans. " They also know that "the success of the movement will require an increased effort from all educators," and that "career education truly is an emerging concept" (Magisos, 1973j P- 15). Historical Background A rationale for reminding individuals of the his torical significance behind any movement was probably stated best by George Santayana of the Detroit Free Press who maintained that "those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (in Silvius & Curry, 1971 j p. 7^)« A brief history is included in this study to pro vide an understanding of the development of man so that one may appreciate the movements leading to the concept or strategy now known as career education. Almost since the beginning of man on earth, he has strived to improve his situation. Such a motivational pat tern has meant that man has had to discover, invent, learn, and teach the new ways as he progressed. Man's first requirements are food, shelter, and clothing; although he may have spent 90 percent of his waking time supplying these requirements for his early existence, he had only his own energy and ingenuity to call upon for survival. In educating himself about the principles of nature, he enabled himself to provide for his needs. He discovered, invented, learned, and taught the use of weapons and tools to perform specific tasks. Man continued to learn as he domesticated animals for his food and clothing and for their assistance in his daily work. Probably the main dis covery was that of fire, which led to the smelting of ore. However, progress was slow, mainly because of ineffective communications and the incapability of passing knowledge on to the next generation. "Skill of hand in those primal activities was man's great source of power over the envi ronment" (Bennett, 1926, p. 11). The arrival of the later centuries brought with it the realization that the ability to read, write, and calculate effectively would hasten technological progress and would enhance man's way of life (McLea, 1971, p. 217). Early education saw parent teaching child through "unconscious imitation," the ways of provid ing for needs and survival. With the controlling of fire and the development of skills, a simplified division of labor was made possible which ushered in a new era of instruction referred to as "conscious imitation, where the content was the refined skills of accomplished workmen and artisans" (Bailey & Stadt, 1973j p. 169)* The work ethic, as Western societies have known it, was developed early through the ancient Jewish law which stated that it was the duty of the parents to teach each son a trade to "insure his becoming a useful member of society" (Bennett, 1926, p. 3). This idea of indenture carried on through the history of the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi (2200 B.C.), Greece, Egypt, and Europe until it was finally transplanted in the colonies of New England, as exemplified in the following quotation: Know all men that I, Thomas Metlard, with the Consent of Henry Wolcott of Winsor unto whose cos- tody and care at whose charge I was brought over 17 out of England into New England, doe bynd myself as an apprentise for eight years to serve William Pyn- chon of Springfield, his heires and assigns in all manner of lawful employmt unto the fullest of eight yeeres beginnings the 29 day of Sept, 1640 and the said William doth condition to find the said Thomas meat drinke and clothing filling such an apprentise and at the end of his tyme one new sute of apparell and forty shilling in mony: subscribed this 28 Octo ber 1640. (U.S. Department of Labor, 1952, p. l) Great stories have evolved out of the past about educating the youth of that day through use of apprenticeships and of the system of parents teaching their children. It is becoming apparent today through the career education con cept that there has been a return to the philosophies of American leaders in education that increasingly stress a return to parent, community, and industrial involvement in the process of learning. Early American schools, requiring the full time of students and providing a curriculum preparatory to occupa tions in agriculture, engineering, and mechanical arts, began with the educator Gardiner Lyceum in 1823 and with the Rensselair Polytechnic Institute founded in 1824 which emphasized that the principle of teaching was "that a num ber of well-cultivated farms and workshops in the vicinity of the school be entered on the records of the school as places of scholastic exercise for students, where the application of the sciences may be most conveniently taught" (Ricketts, 1914, p. 34). This orientation ties in with career education's concept of preparation for work. 18 The Land-Grant Acts of 1862 and 1890 are examples of Fed eral support initiated for the preparation of youth to enter the world of work from the collegiate level. The 1900's earmarked the inception and establish ment of the manual training high schools throughout many cities in the United States. This type of "career" train ing passed through many cycles: Manual Arts, Industrial Arts, Vocational Education, Occupational Education, and Technical Education. Career Education— National Outlook Current Status According to Bell (1974), U.S. Commissioner of Education, the signs surrounding career education are encouraging and positive. Some of the particularly impor tant signs were noted by Bell to be as follows: 1. The appearance of a congressional mandate for career education (Section 406, Title IV, P.L. 93-380). 2. Favorable consideration by Congress of the appropriation of funds earmarked for career education. 3. The creation of a National Advisory Council on career education. 4. The formation of an inter-agency team, repre senting the Department of Health, Education 19 and Welfare and the Departments of Commerce and Labor. This team will study the relation ships between education and work. 5. The considerable support and growth of career education at the local level. Approximately 5,000 of the 17,000 school districts in the United States have active career education programs. 6. The favorable consideration by six state legislatures which have passed career educa tion resolutions as well as the expression of interest in the amount of support at the state level. More than half of the state boards of education have adopted policy statements supporting career education. More than three-fourths of the state depart ments have full-time professional people working in career education. 7. Strong interest if not commitment by non governmental groups such as the National Education Association, National Youth Organ izations, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, National Advisory Council on Voca tional Education, and the National Urban Coalition. 20 8. A position paper on career education adopted by the U.S. Office of Education. Challenges Although the outlook for career education could be judged as bright, Bell has listed several challenges which ought to be met as progress is made toward continued imple mentation of the career education concept within American schools. The following priority appeared to be particular ly crucial to Bell:'" 1. Balanced Federal funding with state and local funding to preserve the concept that good education will continue to be a Federal con cern, a state responsibility, and a local function. It is vital that the "grass roots" initiative not be lost. 2. A continued effort to "enhance and stimulate local initiative and creativity," which could be helpful. A collaborative effort is needed to make education, as preparation for work, a major goal of business-labor-industry-profes- sional-government-community along with the profession, home, and family. 3. Evaluation and improvement of effective pro grams in career education. 4. Expansion of the concept to make it a truly 21 lifelong process which would appear to be bene ficial to society. 5. Career education for all. Career Education in California The study of career education has shown that great interest is being generated in California. This emphasis has been characterized by the California state legislature passing a resolution for the Education Code, Section 7504, dealing specifically with the implementation of the career education concept within the public schools of the state. It is further noted that the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Wilson Riles, along with the State Department of Education, and the State Board of Education has sup ported the concept through the creation of the California Career Education Task Force. The Task Force was charged with the following objectives: 1. To determine the state of the art in career education. 2. To determine explicitly what the concept of career education entails. 3. To develop operational career education models. 4. To provide statewide leadership. 5. To prepare a master plan for career education in California. 22 The first objective was fulfilled, by the Task Force compiling a bibliography of articles, books, research reports, and general reports. The second objective resulted in setting career education goals for students such as self-awareness, career awareness, economic aware ness, educational awareness, attitude development, consumer competencies, exploration, and career preparation; also developed was a set of broad objectives appropriate for students at each grade level, kindergarten through grade twelve. (The task force approach to career education, 197 p. 9) The third objective brought about the implementa tion of ten demonstration sites which involved 65 schools. The sites were located in the Camino Union Elementary School District; Ceres Unified School District, Covina- Valley Unified School District, Los Angeles Unified School District, Richmond Unified School District, Orange Unified School District, Sacramento City Unified School District, Santa Barbara City Elementary and High School Districts, and the offices of the county superintendents of schools of San Diego and Sonoma. The Task Force also provided technical assistance which included program planning, developing, and evaluation. The fourth objective has involved the Task Force not only in responding to requests for information, publi cations, and legislative analysis but also in serving as a consultancy agency. 23 The fifth objective was designed to create a mas ter plan "to outline a strategy for state leadership in the development and expansion of career education" (The task force approach to career education, 197^j P. 9). Related Studies As a new concept in education, career education is gaining momentum in the field of research and thus is developing new insights and knowledge concerning its design of curriculum, its implementation through instructional programs, and the evaluation of those programs. A search of several sources, the Review of Educational Research, the Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Comprehensive Dissertation Index, and the Education Resources Informa tion Center (ERIC) for resum<§ studies regarding career education located at Northern Illinois University was performed. Although the search of these sources revealed much information and material on career education and although many definitions were located, no research has been developed which attempts to determine the most desir able components or elements which should be included in a definition. The following random sampling of career edu cation definitions selected from various states illustrates the need for a clarification of components which are desir able to a definition of career education. 24 : In Arizona career education was defined by Shof- stall as "combining the academic world with the world of work. It must be available at all levels of education . . . it is a blending of vocational* the general* and the col lege, preparatory education" (in Magisos* 1973* P- 16). In California career education has been defined by the State Department of Education Career Education Task Force in 1972 (in Magisos* 1973* P- 16)* in a position paper on career development and preparation* as an educa tional thrust designed to (a) infuse concepts of career development and preparation into all the disciplines and educational experiences for all learners at all levels and (b)'provide each student with a coordinated educational experience consisting of career awareness* career explora tion* career preparation* career guidance* and placement. The New Jersey State Department has taken the posi tion that career education is an integral dimension of the nursery through adult curriculum which provides for all students a sequential continuum of experiences through which each individual may develop a more realistic percep tion of his capabilities and prepare him for entry and reentry Into employment and/or continuing education (in Magisos* 1973* p. 17). Recent Studies in California Two studies* recently completed at the University of Southern California, School of Education, contained in their conclusions and recommendations statements regarding the need for a coordinated definition of career education. One investigator stated: "There continues to be a need to narrow and communicate the definition and scope of career education to educators and to the public" (Martin, 1975). The other concluded: "Confusion about career education definition and goals hinders its acceptance by both educa tors and the public" (Ayres, 1974). As a result of these observations the researchers have recommended that leaders in career education should agree upon components for a definition of career education and use the areas to be investigated in the determination of the feasibility of entering into career education and should articulate these components to staffs and community alike. Future of Career Education In conversation with the leaders of the career education movement in California, along with the priorities and leadership being given by the California State Depart ment of Education and the United States Office of Educa tion, the genuine commitment to implement the concept on the part of many districts would seem to indicate that developments are going to continue for some time to come. Therefore, it is essential that a basis for formulating a definition of career education and for determining its 26 feasibility be established as a guide to those districts contemplating implementation of a career education program. Summary The possibility that career education can reshape the American educational scene from kindergarten through adult level seems more probable than when it was first proposed. If this momentum is to be sustained, two ques tions must be answered as carefully and as thoroughly as possible: (l) What are the components or elements to a definition of career education? and (2) What areas must a district investigate to determine the feasibility of enter ing into a career education program? Although the antecedents of career education date back much further than 1971* Marland has given great impetus to career education as a means of reshaping the American educational system. After Marland stepped down as Commissioner, Ottina stated that "career education has so much support among educators, local school boards, state legislators, Industry and civic groups In the last three years that its widespread Installation in schools and colleges seems assured" (197^-* p. 35). The California Career Education Task Force is pro viding leadership, assistance, and direction for implement ing the concept in this state. This research was undertaken to strengthen the continuing need for a study on the definition and feasibil ity of career education. CHAPTER III THE PROCEDURE In Chapters I and II the significance of the study was discussed and a review of pertinent literature was made. In this chapter the methods and procedure used in the study are discussed which includes the endorsement, selection of the jury., and the development of the Data Gathering Instrument. The validation by the jury and the components of the jury responses are studied in order that the collection and treatment of data have meaning. Endorsement of the Study This study was endorsed by the Career Education Task Force of the State of California Department of Educa tion through Paul N. Peters, the manager. The official endorsement facilitated the collection of data, not only through its sanction, but also through its placement of the researchers in communication with the directors and coordinators of career education programs currently under Title III funding. Prior to the inception of this study the research ers consulted with Paul N. Peters and Dr. Kenneth Densley, 28 29 Director of Research, in order to obtain guidance for the direction of the study. This endorsement and guidance contributed to in- depth Interviews that otherwise would not have been possible. A copy of Peter's endorsement (dated January 30, 1975) and of other correspondence with his office is embodied in Appendix A. Selection of the Jury Men and women were selected for the Validation Jury who were knowledgeable about and interested in career edu cation. In order to obtain objectivity these individuals were selected from various walks of life, not only from the ranks in education. The jury as finally constituted consisted of representatives from (a) a national school executive organization; (b) the U.S. Office of Education; (c) an industrial educational council; (d) a public rela tions firm specializing in city and county government work; (e) secondary school administration; (f) the world of art; (g) the California State Department of Education; (h) administration on the community college level; (i) two boards of education--rural and urban; (j) a career educa tion program; and (k) the lay community. Prospective jurors were reached by phone and letter informing them of the research and requesting them to 30 serve on the validating committee of the Data Gathering Instrument. All of those with whom communication had been made responded in a positive manner. A letter (dated January 23, 1975, included in Appendix B) outlining the study and inviting the prospec tive juror to the validating meeting of January 30, 1975 accompanied a copy of the interview guide (Jury Validation Check Sheet, contained in Appendix B). Each juror was asked to judge the Instrument as to Its form and accuracy, to evaluate each item as to its applicability toward career education, to add items to any area that might have been overlooked, and to strike any ambiguous statement now included. The reason for mailing the Instrument was to allow the jurors sufficient time to read and to analyze care fully the material contained and to make comments. The structured group meeting of task force members and career education leaders was preferred over the mailed question naire for the reason that terminology and contextual ques tions could be aired prior to changes being made. The following persons served on the jury of spe cialists who validated the wording and content of the Data Gathering Instrument: Joseph J. Allen, Vice President for public affairs Graham Kislingburg Public Relations. Prior to his recent retirement from city employment Allen served for 28 years in executive positions for the city and county of San Francisco. He was executive secretary to three former mayors and Deputy Director of the San Francisco Housing Authority. Emil Anderson, principal of Downtown Senior High School in the San Francisco Unified School District. Anderson has served in the ranks of public education as teacher, coun selor, dean, vice principal, and principal for the past 25 years. Downtown High School is a career education school in which students attend classes one half day and then work in their special interest field the other half day. Kenneth Densley, Director of Research for the California State Career Education Task Force. His experience includes 8 years in public school teaching, 4 years in college teaching, and 9 years with the State Department of Edu cation. Floyd E. Elkins, Dean of Instruction for Career Education at Skyline Community College. Elkins has had 20 years of experience in business and industry and has been administratively responsi ble for all career programs at the college. Kenneth Hoyt, Associate Commissioner of Education, U.S. Office of Education based in Washington, D.C. Hoyt has been a lecturer on the subject of career education for the past 10 years. John Kidder, member of the San Francisco Board of Education since 1972. Kidder is the Business Man ager for the Technical Engineers Union Local 21. He is the chairman of the Curriculum Committee of the San Francisco Board of Education. Bryant Lane, Director of Career and Occupational Education for the San Francisco Unified School District. Lane was a local and regional repre sentative for the California Teachers Association Board of Directors. He has served on the Task Force committee for the California State Plan for Vocational Education. Currently he is a member of the Association of Urban School Directors of Vocational Education and the Great Cities Task Force for Vocational Education. Lane, through his office,is charged with implementing the 33 career education concept In the San Francisco Unified School District. Lane is also the administrator of the San Francisco County, Regional Occupational Programs. 8. Ruth Asawa Lanier, artist-in-schools, panelist, and sculptor. She has stated that her education has encompassed many aspects of what is called career education. She cites the work-study pro gram at Black Mountain College in North Carolina which she attended. Collections of her work are held by many public figures and the Whitney and the Oakland Museums. She is a member of the National Advisory Panel on the National Endow ment for the Arts' Artist-in-Schools Program. Wilson Riles, Superintendent of Public Instruc tion for the State of California has appointed her to the RISE Commission (Reform in Interme diate-Secondary Education). 9. Michael Lyons, Dean, Woodrow Wilson High School, San Francisco Unified School District. Lyons is the current vice president of the Board of Education in Brisbane, California as well as a member of the San Francisco Unified School Dis trict Superintendents Career Education Task Force. He is completing a doctoral dissertation 34; ] at Stanford University on the use of career education as a motivational tool for high school students. Lyons authored A Career Counseling Model which explains the techniques and resources used in an experimental course in career education for the secondary level. 10. Dorice Murphy., parent and community advocate. She is currently involved in the development of career ladder component for the newly created position in the San Francisco Unified School District of School Aide III. She Is developing a resource bank for varying career components for the Alvarado School Community Art Program. In 1972-1973 she was appointed by the San Fran cisco Board of Education to serve as chairman for the Nutrition Committee. This committee provided information to the San Francisco Board of Education prior to their establishing a career education component into the district's master plan for nutrition. 11. Debra Vild, Executive Assistant, National Acad emy for School Executives and Associate Director of the Danforth Project, Washington, D.C. She has served as Associate Director, curriculum developer, evaluation specialist, and staff development consultant for the Mesa Career Education Project which was one of six sites initially selected by the United States Office of Education. She has worked as a consultant in career education to the following projects from 1972-197^: Scottsdale Arizona Career Education Project; Pinal County Project; Northern Arizona University; Cartwright School District; American Society for Curriculum Devel opment Conference; Institute of Educational Development, New York; and Policy Studies in Education, New York. 12. Henry Weiss, Executive Vice President, Indus trial Education Council with offices in north ern and southern California. He has coordinated the concept of industry working with education. Development of the Data Gathering Instrument The Instrument employed In the data gathering procedure, hereinafter referred to as the Data Gathering Instrument {see Appendix C), was formulated after an extensive review of the literature. The search included both formal (ERIC) and informal (random Index) techniques to determine not only the various components and elements that have been most frequently utilized in definitions of career education but also the areas a district must 36 investigate to determine the feasibility of entering into career education. Prior to the presentation of the Data Gathering Instrument to the validation jury it was pilot tested on (1) a director of career education in a unified district; (2) a director of occupational skills in a district con sidering the feasibility of entering into a career educa tion program; (3) four teaching staff members who had been involved in career education programs for a minimum of three years, and (4) four students who had recently been graduated from high schools with career education programs. Validation by the Jury Following the pilot test a design for response by the jury was selected that would allow each respondent to record his selection by placing a check mark in one of four columns headed: (l) highly or most desirable, (2) advisable, (3) unnecessary or irrelevant, and (4) avoid (or detri mental ). Instructions were given that if a respondent had no opinion all of the columns should be left blank. The format of five columns (one for no opinion) was considered, but was rejected on the basis that noncommittal responses could be attracted. The statements were designed to maxi mize the probabilities of responses by the selected inter viewees. Space was allotted for comments and additional thoughts by the respondents in both Question A, regarding 37 components to the definition, and Question B, regarding the feasibility of entering into a career education pro gram. On the evening of January 30., 1975 the validation jury met for dinner at the Treasure Island Officer's Club in San Francisco. The Data Gathering Instrument was dis cussed and the jury's judgments were recorded. After the meeting., copies of the Data Gathering Instrument were collected and the responses tabulated. Components of Jury Responses The jury reviewed the Data Gathering Instrument and gave many evaluations. Other considerations were brought forth when jury members exchanged ideas. These responses were recorded by tape as well as in writing. The choice categories henceforth referred to as response alternatives were defined as follows: 1. Highly or most desirable: Without this compo nent the definition or feasibility study would fail or be less than adequate. 2. Advisable: This component or area to be inves tigated will aid the definition or feasibility study. 3. Unnecessary or irrelevant: Not a required component or area to be investigated for the definition or feasibility study. • 38 4. Avoid, or detrimental: This component or area to be investigated will hinder the definition or feasibility study. Those components or areas to be investigated which were scored in column number one (highly or most desirable) or in column two (advisable) were retained. Those scored in column three (unnecessary or irrelevant) or in column four (avoid or detrimental) were either rewritten to the specifications of the jury or were eliminated from the revised Data Gathering Instrument. Study Population In the determination of the population for this study* counsel was sought from Paul N. Peters* the Manager of the California State Career Education Task Force. Through Peters and the Task Force’s Director of Research, Kenneth Densley* the population of 4l participants (31 coordinators and directors of the California career educa tion programs plus 10 members of the California Career Education Task Force) for this study was limited to the following: The members of the State of California Career Education Task Force-- Paul N. Peters Maria Arrevalo Kenneth Densley Larry Harrington Mary Lou Hill Joe McGhee Frank Santoro Joseph Thomson James Toogood Sue Weinheimer The project directors and/or coordinators of sites whose programs were accepted by the Task Force as being exemplary and funded under Part C or Part D of the Voca tional Education Act of 1968-- Camino Union School District Ceres Unified School District (Consortium) Covina-Valley Unified School District Los Angeles Unified School District Orange Unified School District Richmond Unified School District Santa Ana Unified School District (Consortium) Santa Barbara School District Sacramento City Unified School District San Diego County Office of Education Sonoma County Office of Education The two Part D sites were Ceres and the Orange Consortium. Project directors and/or coordinators of selected districts within the State of California that currently have Career Education Programs-- Fremont Unified School District Grossmont Union High School District La Mesa-Spring Valley Elementary School District Los Angeles County Schools Marin County Schools Milpitas Unified School District Monterey Peninsula Unified School District Ontario-Montclair Elementary School District Sacramento County Schools Salinas Union High School District San Diego City Unified School District San Mateo County Schools San Diego County Schools These sourcesj, with their diversities of programs and geographical locations were judged to be representative of the state of California. Collection of the Data Permission was granted from Peters for the researchers to conduct a structured interview with the members of the Career Education Task Force (see letter dated February 16, 1975 In Appendix D). A copy of the problem statement and a copy of the Data Gathering Instru- 4l merit were mailed one week prior to the interview, and agenda time was allotted at the February 24, 1975 meeting of the Task Force for the purpose of responding to the instrument. The superintendents of the districts surveyed were approached and authorization was requested (see letter dated February 10,, 1975 in Appendix D) to interview selected career education personnel. Upon receipt of authorization, small group meetings for the purpose of responding to the Data Gathering Instrument were scheduled in strategic California locations, and study respondents were invited to attend (see letters in Appendix D). A copy of the problem statement and a copy of the Data Gath ering Instrument were mailed to the study respondents one week prior to the meeting. The study respondents who were unable to attend these meetings or who were in a geographi cal location not lending itself to a general meeting were reached, and arrangements were made for a structured inter view to be conducted at their convenience (see letter In Appendix D). At the time of each interview, the Data Gathering Instrument instructions and terminology were reviewed. If any questions arose, the researchers were present to give individual responses, but in each case the interviewee was asked to respond to the item as stated. Respondents were invited to make additional comments or amplifications to items in the Data Gathering Instrument. Treatment of the Data The study was designed to determine through Cali fornia Career Education Specialists the components or elements necessary in a definition of career education as well as the resources necessary when considering the feasi bility of a career education. Data obtained from the study were tabulated in terms of frequencies and of response to each of the four response categories for the respective questions. Summary The problem for this study was chosen after a care ful review of the literature on career education revealed a need by school districts to have listed the component elements in a definition of career education., and also to know what resources were necessary when considering the feasibility of a career education program. A Data Gathering Instrument was developed through a jury validation of component elements and of feasibility considerations deemed useful in answering the questions posed by the study. Authorizations to conduct interviews were sought. Interviews scheduled. Data Gathering Instruments mailed, and structured Interviews conducted with the members of the California State Career Education Task Force, the 18 project directors and/or coordinators of sites accepted by the Task Force and funded under Part C or Part D of the ■ Vocational Education Act of 1968* and the project directors; and/or coordinators of 12 selected districts within the state of California that currently have career education programs. The data were tabulated for subsequent analyses and interpretations. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS Introduction The purpose of the study was two-fold in that it attempted (a) to determine the components or elements that should receive consideration in a definition of career education and (b) to identify the areas of concern that a district should investigate to ascertain the feasibility of entering into a career education program. The informa tion sought was obtained through structured interviews with career education specialists* namely the members of the California Career Education Task Force* and selected directors and coordinators of California programs in career education. Question A* which was concerned with identifica tion of elements in a definition of career education* was divided into four subquestions. Question B* on determina tion of areas of concern underlying the feasibility of undertaking a career education program* was also divided Into four subquestions. The Findings The results of the investigation which are 44 45 detailed in Tables 1* 2, and 3, were organized within the framework of the two major questions and subquestions posed. Data for Question A are set forth in Table 1. Question A What would be the components or elements to be included in a definition of career education? Prom the researchers 1 review of literature and search in other areas, a list of components or elements for a definition of career education was established. Of the many components or elements identified., 35 out of 38 were selected by at least one respondent as being highly or most desirable by local, state, and national leaders in the career education movement as shown in Table 1. The 4l study respondents were offered the oppor tunity to assign priorities to each statement representing a component or element on a 4-point scale in the steps which have been indicated in a legend just prior to Ques tion A as highly or most desirable, advisable, unnecessary or irrelevant, or avoid. They were also given the option of no mark (nm) or no response. An open-ended question afforded the respondents the opportunity to list other concepts of career education that should be included in a definition. 46 Table 1 Analysis of Definition Components or Elements Legend: 1. HIGHLY or MOST DESIRABLE -- without this component or element, the definition of career education would fail or be less than adequate. 2. ADVISABLE -- this1component or element will aid the definition of career education. 3. UNNECESSARY or IRRELEVANT -*■ not a required component or element for a definition of career education. 4. AVOID or DETRIMENTAL — this component or element will hinder the definition of career education. NM No Mark — respondent had no reaction to this statement. Question A — WHAT ARE THE COMPONENTS OR ELEMENTS TO A DEFINITION OF CAREER EDUCATION? DEFINITION COMPONENTS OR ELEMENTS Career education is a. a lifeling process that ex tends from early childhood through adult life. RESPONSES b. a point of view. NM 10 B 60 100% 19.51 1 21.95 17.07 39.02 2.44 c. a supporting instrument ror formal learning. 10 so N M 100 % 26.83 48.78 ■Pi 17.07 P! 7.32 H ...O.JOO 47| Table 1-continued 42 d. designed primarily for children of middle and working class. 1 HUM 4.88 95.12 e. to prepare youth and adults for productive and rewarding lives. 10 6 0 100 K 1 80.4S 3 14.63 3 ■ 4.88 4 r O.OC NM 1 f. to condition people to a life in the world of work. NM 24. 3S 39.02 17.07 19.51 g. a philosophic concept. NM 43.9( 2 1. & 17.07 ■L . 17.07 rT h. a specific set of programs. NM 10 60 E M 100 I t 4.8f 14^63 60.98 i. an early orientation to the world of work. 10 60 100 * p i 36.5£ 36.55 14.6’ 48 Table 1 j. learning concerned with occupational clusters. k. learning concerned with career ladders. 1. a concept which involves the participation of industry. continued ■ l „ Q . _ 1 M itt 26.8: . 4 6 * 3 ' 4 rF- N M | I ± Z * IJY .9.17 4 10 so 100 % : W F m 29.27 48.78 4 P N M | 9.76 11 60^98 34 15 4.88 0.00 m. is rooted in the present or near future. n, designed to place people into jobs. o. to be associated with programs in vocational education. m ■ E 1 iO 1( O % 4 1 . 4 6 2 6 . 8 3 NM 1 | 1 7 * 0 7 . 12 2 0 . 2 * 4 .4 1 0 __________ 50 __________________100 % : U - - 2.44 26*83. NM 24*39. 43*9.0. 2.44 10 50 100 % t , ! | ^. 3 ■ P f ...4*88 36.59 NM 17*07 36.59 4*8.8. Table 1-continued i 49 p. intended for all people. 95.12 q. needed by all people. io so ioo% 85.37 ■ 9.76 3 4.88 4 NM 0.00 r. the development of special and general abilities to help indi viduals and groups obtain, hold and advance in a job or series of jobs constituting a career. pa.. i i in % ----- 43.90 43 .90 3 P 4 r 2.44 NM | s. a way of perceiving the relation ship between the world of learn ing and the world of work. 1 2 3 4 NM 73.17 24.39 n.nn 7.44 10 50 100 % 1 1 0.00 a comprehensive educational pro- 2 ■ 7.32_ gram focusing strictly on occu- 3 ■ ■ ■ 1 19.51 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a 73.17 NM | [ | | | | J | 10 50 100 % u. a concept that involves the participation of the community. 1 2 3 4 NM 63.41 36.59 0.00 0.00 50! Table 1-continued v. a form of tracking w. a concept which involves the participation of trade unions. NM 10 50 100% 36. S£ 46.34 7.32 9.71 2. All education must be reformu lated around career education. NM 31.71 39.02 14.63 | | 3. Career education may be thought of as an approach to teaching, counseling and learning. 1 2 3 4 NM 78.05 19.51 0.00 7,44 4. Career education gives particu lar attention to helping the individual prepare for intelli gent decision making. 10 50 100 % 87.80 12.20 3 4 NM n , 0 0 0.00 5. Career education affords a means to reduce the unemploy ment rate. NM 50 100 % l~ 7.32 P - 34.15 r 31.71 r 21.95 i . 4..88 51 Table 1—continued 6 . Career education involves occupational decision making. Q . 1 KLS _________ 4 8 . 7f 2 4 * . 9( 3 ■ . 7 . 3 ; ♦ r 0 . 0 ( NM 1 7. Career education fosters occupational skills. 10 60 100% 1 1 3 6 . 5£ 2 4« 7? 9 : 7£ < r 2.44 N M | 2.44 8 . Career education is to be asso ciated with programs in voca tional education. N M ■ T i g R 9 .7 6 | 3 4 .1 5 21.95 31.71 2 .4 4 9. Career education fosters attitudes1 conducive to the acceptance of 3 occupational responsibility. 4 N M 5 3 .6 6 34 .1 5 f Q^ZA 2 .4 4 r 10 60 100 % 1 10. Career education should provide 2 support for developing the poten- 3 tial of each individual. 4 N M 9 2 .6 8 I qq q 4 .8 8 V 2 .4 4 q 0 .0 0 10 60 100 « 11. Career education provides progress1 along a pathway, not arrival at a } destination. , N M 63.41 24.39 4 . 8 8 7 .3 2 52 Table 1-continued 12. Career education provides a broad approach to preparation for citizenship. 0 mu. 46.34 43.90 4.88 Q-QQ 4.88 13. Career education provides a broad 1 approach to preparation for * career development. 10 60 i 4 NM 100% 70.73 26.83 0.00 2.44 14. Career education provides a broad approach to preparation for an avocation. iO_ ._irOJfi___ 46.34 46.34 7.32 0.00 15. Career education in grades K through 12 is articulated* horizontally and vertically, at each grade level. 16. Career education stresses individualized instruction. f£f 10 60 100 It 46.34 43.90_ 3 ■ 7.32 * Jl 2.44 NM " 53 Question 1 What would be the highly or most desirable compo nents or elements which should be included in a definition of career education? This question was designed as the first segment of Question A to determine what the selected leaders thought were the highly or most desirable components or elements in a definition of career education. Five components or elements were selected in this category by at least 85 percent of the study population. Of the 41 respondents, 95 percent or 39 individuals stated that career education is intended for all people. The definition components that career education is a lifelong process that extends from early childhood through adult life and that career education should provide support for developing the potential of each individual were ranked by 93 percent or 38 of the respondents as highly or most desirable. The statement that career education gives particu lar attention to helping the individual prepare for intelli gent decision making was ranked as highly or most desirable for a definition by 88 percent or 36 of the respondents. Thirty-five respondents, or 85 percent, agreed that the statement, "Career education is needed by all people," was highly or most desirable in a definition of career education. Question 2 What would be the components or elements consid ered advisable which would aid in the definition of career education? The percentage of response to this question ran from zero for the statement that "Career education is designed primarily for children of the middle or working class" to 49 for the statements that "Career education is learning concerned with career ladders," that "Career education fosters occupational skills," and that "Career education is a supporting instrument for formal learning." For a different perspective of Question A one may look to the responses to alternatives one and two combined that were equal to or greater than 85 percent. Such a combination of responses makes it possible to ascertain the components or elements that were selected as highly or most desirable or advisable to the definition of career education. The following 20 statements and the correspond ing approximate percentages of responses reflect what were judged to be the highly or most desirable or the advisable components to a definition of career education: 1. Career education is intended for all people (100 percent). 2. Career education is a concept that involves participation by the community (100 percent). 3. Career education gives particular attention to helping the individual prepare for intelli gent decision making (100 percent). 55 4. Career education may be thought of as an approach to teachings counseling, and learn ing (98 percent). 5. Career education should provide support for developing the potential of each individual (98 percent). 6. Career education provides a broad approach to preparation for career development (98 percent). 7. Career education in grades K-12 is articulated, horizontally and vertically, at each grade level (98 percent). 8. Career education is a way of perceiving the relationship between the world of learning and the world of work (98 percent). 9. Career education is a concept which involves the participation of industry (95 percent). 10. Career education is needed by all people (95 percent). 11. Career education is a lifelong process that extends from early childhood through adult life (95 percent). 12. Career education is to prepare youth and adults for productive and rewarding lives (95 percent). 13. Career education involves occupational decision making (93 percent). 14. Career education provides a broad approach to preparation for an avocation (93 percent). 15. Career education provides a broad approach to preparation for citizenship (90 percent). 16. Career education stresses individualized instruction (90 percent). 17. Career education fosters attitudes conducive to the acceptance of occupational responsi bility (88 percent). 18. Career education provides progress along a pathway, not arrival at a destination (88 percent). 19. Career education is the development of spe cial and general abilities to help individuals and groups obtain, hold, and advance in a job or series of jobs constituting a career (88 percent). 20. Career education fosters occupational skills (85 percent). Question 3 What components or elements should be consid ered unnecessary or irrelevant in a definition of career education? Although 37 out of 38 components received some degree of support in terms of responses to alternatives one or two, five statements receiving 20 percent or more responses as being unnecessary or irrevelant along with their corresponding percentages were: 1. Career education affords a means to reduce the unemployment rate (32 percent). 2. Career education is designed to place people into jobs (24 percent). 3. Career education is a comprehensive educa tional program focusing strictly on occupa tions (22 percent). 4. Career education is to be associated with programs in vocational education (22 percent). 5. Career education is a specific set of programs (20 percent). 57 Question 4 What components or elements should be avoided in a definition of career education? The three items that more than 70 percent of the respondents indicated as being ones to avoid by marking the fourth alternative along with their corresponding per centages were: 1. Career education is designed primarily for children of the middle and working class (95 percent). 2. Career education is a form of tracking (90 percent). 3. Career education is a comprehensive educa tional program focusing strictly on occupa tions (73 percent). Eleven of the statements were not assigned a mark in the fourth alternative by a single respondent. If the reader observes the combined responses in the third and fourth alternatives for Question A, he would note that four statements received negative endorsements in excess of 80 percent in terms of answers categorized as unnecessary or irrelevant or to be avoided in a definition of career education: 1. Career education is designed primarily for children of the middle and working class (100 percent). 2. Career education is a form of tracking (95 percent). 58 3. Career education is a comprehensive educa tional program focusing strictly on occupa tions (93 percent). 4. Career education is a specific set of programs (80 percent). In Question A the seventeenth statement was posed to encourage the respondents to provide additional compo nents or elements to a definition of career education. The following are responses from the members of the Cali fornia Career Education Task Force and from the selected leaders or career education programs in California: 1. Career education is a catalytic agent for improving "career relevance" of all instruc tional and guidance systems. 2. Career education stresses consumer competen cies . 3. Career education is a comprehensive blending of academic or general education with what has been traditionally viewed as vocational— a fusing of subject matter into a new curricu lum breaking down previous and false distinc tions or "territories." 4. Career education is developmental and sequen tial . 5. Career education is a part of— not apart from the total educational approach. 6. Career education provides relevancy to all instructional approaches. 7. Career education enhances academic education. 8. Career education is another alternative approach to the total development of the individual. 9. Career education is an open entry-exit concept. 59 10. Career education Is a preparation for life; as a parent's responsibility is to prepare a child to leave home, so should a school prepare a student to lead a life compatible to his abili ties and interests. 11. Career education provides a broad approach to preparation for individual life styles. 12. Career education is a process. 13. Career education is a methodology of instruc tion, not a program of instruction. 14. Career education is preparation for leaving the educational system. 15. Career education is a broad approach to prepa ration for work, paid or unpaid, that Is of benefit to oneself or others and enhances one's self-fulfillment. 16. Career education encompasses content of all subject areas or disciplines and is infused with career education concepts. 17. Career education is self-awareness. 18. Career education is economic awareness, appreciation, and attitude. 19. Career education is educational awareness. 20. Career education stresses employability skills. 21. Career education encompasses leisure time activities. 22. Career education is a process. 60 Question B What areas of concern must a district investigate to determine the feasibility of entering into a career education program? The components or elements under Question B of the Data Gathering Instrument were categorized by a subjective content analysis according to common characteristics and grouped into the following eight areas of concern: (1) Area 1.— Assessment of opinions and attitudes of relevant groups toward career education. (2) Area 2.--Relationship of district to industry, labor, and Job information sources (outside agencies). (3) Area 3.--Capabilities of district for personnel training, orientation activities, and funding. (4) Area 4.--Understanding the potential scope of career education. (5) Area 5.— Changes needed in the educational sys tem in terms of an increased level of commitment to (policy endorsement of) career education, modifications in teacher role, administrative reorgani zation, revised curriculum and instruc tional materials, and generation of new competencies for school personnel through retraining. (6) Area 6.--Evaluation criteria for program outcomes. (7) Area 7.--Membership of the committee responsible for career education. (8) Area 8.--Barriers to successful operation of career education. The responses to statements in each of these broad areas of concern were categorized under four different alternatives set forth in the Legend preceding Question B in the Data Gathering Instrument (in Appendix C): (l) highly or most desirable, (2) advisable, (3) unnecessary or; irrelevant, or (4) avoid. These statements were grouped under each of the previously cited broad areas of concern as follows: Area 1: Questions lax, la2 j la3. > la4 . > la-s* la6 ; > an^- Is-s- Area 2: Questions lb, lc, Id. Area 3: Questions lfx* lf2 ; lgx> lg2 > lg3j 2k. Area 4: Questions le, lhx> lbe> lt- 3 , Ijij lj2 . > 2a, 2b, 2c, 2 dx, 2 d2, 2 d3, 2d4, 2 g, 2 1 , 2m (the items lhx and lh2 being excluded as incompatible with lh3). Area 5 : Questions li, 2e, 2f, 2h, 2ix, 2i2, 2i3, 2i4, 2i5, 2 i6, 2 iy, 2i3, 2 j2, 2 j3, 2 « j 4. Area 6 : Questions 2nx, 2nz , 2n3, 2n4, 2ns, 2ne, 2n.7, 2na, 2n9, 2n10. A re a 7 : Q u e s tio n s ,5a, yo} 3 c , 3 d , 3 e , J>f} 3*b 3 ^ 3.L 3 k , 31^ 3m, 3^j 3 o , 3 P> 3<3jl> 3<l3- A re a 8 : Q u e s tio n s 4 x , 42 , 4 3 , 44 , 4 ^ , 46 . The determination of the percentages of responses to each of the eight broad areas just enumerated was effected by calculating an average of the percentages of responses within each of the four categories of response (1--highly or most desirable, 2--advisable, 3--unnecessary or irrelevant, and 4— avoid) on the Data Gathering Instru ment. The fifth potential category of no response was not included although detailed information regarding the responses of the 4l participants to each component or sub element in the Data Gathering Instrument is reported in Table 2. The summary information for broad categories is provided in Table 3 to allow for comparisons across broad areas as well as an interpretation of major outcomes. With respect to each of the eight broad areas the summary information about overall percentages of response within each of the first four alternatives on the Data Testing Instrument may be reported in terms of providing answers to each of the four subquestions (one subquestion per alternative) as follows: Question 1 What areas of concern would be highly or most desirable for a district to Investigate In determining the feasibility of entering into career education? In order of importance as defined by the magnitudes of the average percentage of endorsements assigned to the first response alternative (highly or most desirable) of statements within each of the eight broad categories, the eight areas of concern along with their percentages were: (1) Area 1.--Assessment of opinions and attitudes of relevant groups toward career education (82 percent). (2) Area 3*— Capabilities of district for personnel training, curriculum activities, and funding (76 percent). 63 Table 2 Analysis of Feasibility Components or Elements Legend: 1. HIGHLY or MOST DESIRABLE — without this component or element career education would not be feasible. 2. ADVISABLE — this component or element will aid in making career education feasible. 3. UNNECESSARY or IRRELEVANT — not a required component or element which would make career education feasible. 4. AVOID -- this component or element should not be con sidered in determining the feasibility of career educa tion. NM No Mark -- respondents had no reaction to this statement. Question B — WHAT AREAS MUST A DISTRICT INVESTIGATE TO DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY OF ENTERING INTO A CAREER EDUCATION PROGRAM? FEASIBILITY COMPONENTS or ELEMENTS RESPONSES 1. A career education feasibility study a. includes surveying certain groups to ascertain their i feeling toward career education.2 1 1. administrators * NM 100 % 9 2.. 68 Q-j-QQ- Q.QQ 2. community to bo 100 % n a r p n t c 8 7 .8 0 2 ■ 9 .7 6 3 ^ 0 .0 0 4 ■ 2 .4 4 NM 64 Table 2-continued 4. students 1 2 0 . 0 0 3 0 . 0 0 4 0 , 0 0 NM io BO 100K 5. teachers * V 9:5.12 4. OR 3 4 NM 0.00 0.00 teacher associations 1 ! “I 1 1 nit 46.34 34,1 f i 3 B P 12.20 4 f T 7.32 »«* H i 7. business community i 2 3 4 NM 80.49 17,07- 2.44 0.00 8. trade unions b. involves analyzing the school • district's relationship with industry. 10 60 100 « l 3 3 4 NM 58.54 41.46. 0.00 0.00 65 Table 2-continued c. involves analyzing the school district's relationship with labor. d. involves analyzing the school district's relationship with job information scources. iiur >0 1 » K . ... 48,23 ..43,20 A QO IE --------- 4 . 0 0 2.44 10 60 100 % 73.17 3 4 NM n.nn 0^00 e. involves analyzing the school district's understanding that career education is a total social system in which each of the sub systems — adminis trators, teachers, students, and parents — come to a common understanding of the goal and process of education and the i role that each group plays in z the total system. 3 4 NM 68.29 19.51 7 77 2.44 2.44 f. recognizes that a district must have the capabilities to provide the following 1. inservice training for district personnel. 92.68 Q.0& 2. inservice training for on-site personnel. 9^12 0.00 66 Table 2-continued recognizes that a district must have the capabilities to provide orientation for 1. community 1 2 3 4 NM 78.05 21 .05 0 oc 2. industry 10 60 100 % 73.17 2 74 39 3 1 0 . 0 0 4 1 n.nn NM 1, 2.44 3. trade unions N M _ucoat___ 68.20 21.95 L 2.44 I 4.88 L- 2.44 4. parents 1< OK ao.,49 14.63 3 n.nn 4 0 . 0 0 NM 1; 4_88 h. that is realistic recognizes that a career education program will be planned to include 1. males 10 60 100 % l o.on 2 n.nn 3 0.00 4 0.00 NM 2. females 10 50 100 K i n.nn 2 0.00 3 o.on 4 0.00 NM 67| Table 2-continued 3. both(male § female) 1 2 o.no 3 0 . 0 0 4 o.nn NM i. recognizes that the role of the 2 teacher must change. 3 takes into account the fact a district's facilities 1. will increase that i so._. .. U 34.15 12. 20 19.51 17.07 -17-07. 2. will not increase NM ■ 29.27 7.32 10.SI 12.20 3UZJL 2. In a career education feasibility study a. a district will be required to 2 34.15 36.59 cooperate ana communicate wxtn 3 ■ ■ ■ the university teacher train- 4 19.51 7.32 ing programs. nm | 1 2.44 b. the district recognizes that career education will be re quired of all students regard less of individual goals. 80 100 % ■ R I R H ] 58.54 □ 17.07 z __ 12 . 20 12,20 __! 68 Table 2-continued a district recognizes that it will have to look toward pre viously non-credentialed per sons who are employed in industry. 1 lU 1KLJi___ 36.59 3 9 .(1 7 12.20 4 H — 9.76 NM 1 1 2.44 d. a district must recognize that if the program is to be successful it must be started in 1. every school in the dis trict simultaneously. 2 3 4 NM 10 50 too % L 9.76 ■ 1 7,70 i 26 . 83 7A. 39 ■ 26.83 2. one school at a time. NM rrr r " i r rv v. 12.20 ML 12.20 mm 36.59 TT 4.88 mm 34.15 3. one level at a time (K-6, 7-8, 9-12) NM 50 100 % 14.63 9,76 31.71 14.63 29.27 4. one attendance area at a time. 10 NM 50 100 % 12.20 7.32 3 9 , n ? 14.63 26.83 e. a district must take into account the fact that a dis trict's teaching staff will increase. 10 50 NM 100 ' 0.00 -4.88. 68.29 21. 9.5 4^88 69 Table 2-continued f. a district must take into account the predictions of future manpower needs. 56.1C 2 24.3£ 3 P P 17.0' 4 LI 0.0c NM 1 J 2,4/ 10 g. a district must recognize that career education will reach many students formerly unex posed to the usual vocational offerings, so ioo« 56.1C 34.15 3 I 2.44 ■ 4.88 NM J 2.44 h. the district must recognize that the program will require formal endorsement by those determining policy. 1 2 3 4 NM 90.24 9.76 0.0 C O^QC the district must recognize that if the program is to succeed the following changes must be i made 2 3 1 . textbook must be revised 4 NM 50 14..63 —• > ■ 26.83 IT 17.07 100 % 51.23 39.02 tsxtbooKs must b© 3 4.88 supplemented * B 4.88 NM ^ 3. curriculum guides must be revised. 10 50 100% 1 65.85 2 ^ 29^27 3 I 4.88 * E- 0.00 NM I Table 2-continued 4. teachers retrained 75.61 2 19.51 3 t- 2.44 < 1 2.44 NM | 5. administrators retrained 10 60 100 % 75.61 2 ^ 21.95 3 1 0.00 I 2.44 NM 6. activities replanned 1 2 3 4 NM 78.05 21.95 0.00 0.00 7. availability for on-the- job training. NM 46.34 43.90 4.88 2.44 10 60 8. availability for simula tion. the district must recognize that the following administrative areas will be reorganized 1. non-instructional personnel 10 60 1 2 3 4 NM 100 % 46.34 48.78 ■ 4.88 4 0.00 NM 100 % 36.59 31.71 P P i t 26.83 I. _l 2.44 l i L , 2.44 71 Table 2-continued 2. research support. NM iff f iO 1 46.34 31.71 17 07 p = 1 / . U / 2.44 2.44 3. evaluation support. 10 50 100 % 1 56.10 2 31.71 i ■ 9 .7 6 4 l 0 .0 0 N M | 2 .44 4. guidance. 73.17 24.39 3 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 N M I 2.44 k. the district must recognize the 2 community's ability to fund the 3 program. NM 46.34, 24.39 ■ m 17..0Z Hr 12 J2SL rT 1. the district must recognize the social status of the community. N M 10 I 50 1 00 % 36.59 24.39 19.51 1 9 .5L m. the district must recognize that} follow-up relations with indusr 4 try are essential. 10 50 NM 100 ■ 60.98 31 .7 1 4 .8 8 2.44 72 Table 2-continued n. a district should be prepared to plan on the evaluation of the devised program as per the following criteria 10 so 100 % 1. students respect for work.* 1 ■ 53. et work.* ■ 31.71 9.71 * I_ 2.44 NM £ 2.44 2. skills for employment. l — — _IXa,i,__ 60.98 2 31.71 3 I 4.88 4 1 2.44 NM r 3. students awareness for career opportunities. 90.24 ■p 7.32 1 2.44 4 0.00 NM try. 46.34 41.46 1 pi 9.76 4 r 2.44' nm r 10 60 100 « 5. stronger ties with labor. 43.90 2 34.15 3 P P L 17.07 4 Fi 4.88 NM 73 Table 2-continued 6. stronger ties with job information centers. 56.10 41.46 3 | 2.44 4 0.00 NM 7. knowledge of occupational clusters and career ladders. 10 60 100% 51.23 2 41.46 ■ 4.88 4 r 2.44 NM 8. student acceptance of responsibility. 34.15 9. student respect for authority. NM 24.39 41.46 24.39 7.32 2.44 10. students ability to solve 2 problems and think for 3 themselves. 4 NM 85.37 12.20 2.44 0.00 3. A committee which has the responsibility for a career education feasibility study should include the 10 so a. on-site administrators 1 2 3 4 NM 100 % 90.24 9.76 0.00 non Table 2-continued b. district supervisor of curriculum. .1 2 3 4 NM 80.4S 19.51 O.OC O.OC c. supervisor of industrial arts/ vocational education. 10 50 1oo % ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 63.41 2 31.71 3 ■ 4.88 4 0.00 NM d. supervisor of counseling and guidance. 1 2 3 4 NM 78.05 21 .95 0.00 0.00 e. supervisors of academic areas. 63.41 34.15 3 1 2.44 4 0 . 0 0 NM f. board of education. 10 so 100 % 68.29 24.39 ■ 7.32 4 0.00 NM g. superintendent. 10 50 100 • l ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 70.73 2 24.39 3 I 4.88 4 r 0.00 NM | 75 Table 2-continued 10 eo i. teacher associations. 100 K 43.90 2 39-Q? ^ H Z 12.20 4 ■ 4.88 NM | j. counselors. ___ 90.24 2 ■ 9.76 3 0.00 4 0.00 NM k. students. 1 2 3 4 NM Q.Qfl O-OQ 1. community. 10 BO 100 % 78.05 21.9_5_ 3 4 NM 0.00 0.00 m. industry. 76 Table-2 continued ■ ■ ■ ■ 6 3 . 4 1 n . f r n m RHP/RHP * 2 9 . 2 7 3 L - 2 . 4 4 4 t 4 . 8 8 NM 1 o. community college. 10 60 100 % 6 8 . 2 9 3 1 . 7 1 3 4 NM 0.00 0.00 p. four year college/university. ■ ■ ■ 1 3 6 . 5 9 5 3 . 6 6 3 I 4 . 8 8 4 |L 4 . 8 8 NM ™ representatives from trade unions. h h h h h h i i h 5 6 . 1 0 3 4 . 1 5 3 ■ 4 . 8 8 4 1 4 . 8 8 NM 1 10 60 100 % 1. large businesses 6 0 . 9 8 3 1 . 7 1 3 W ~ 4 . 8 8 * r z 0 . 0 0 . NM | .2 ..4 4 2. small businesses 77 Table-2 continued 3. local, state, and federal * employment programs. 6 5. . - 8. 5 2 4 .3 9 4. There are certain barriers to career education programs. From the list below, please indicate which areas should be addressed by the district in considering the feasibility of a career ed ucation program. a. the barrier of 1. lack of commitment from educators. 73.17 12.20 I 4.88 2.44 1 7.32 2. misunderstanding of the concept. 82.93 17.07 3 4 NM O^QQ 0.00 3. division between occupa- 1 tional and academic ed- 2 ucation. 3 100 % 73.17 14.63 4.S « 2.44 I 4.88 10 50 4. 100 63.41 reluctance ox local a 31.71 leadership-- initiative 3 1 0.00 from board of educa- * 1 2.44 tion. N« C 2.44 78 Table 2-continufed 5. lack of planning skills. NM 10 60 1M l < * . 36.59 51.23 2.44 : 4.88 4.88 10 60 6. lack of positive response 2 to occupational education.3 N M 100 * 34.15 39.02 9.76 9.76 7.32 Table 3 Percentages of the 4l Respondents Endorsing Each of Four Response Alternatives In Each of Eight Broad Areas of Concern Regarding the Feasibility of a School District Entering Into a Career Education Program Area of Concern Response Alternatives 1 Highly or Host Desirable * 2 Advisable * 3 Unnecessary or Irrelevant * k Avoid * Area 1 Assessment of opinions and attitudes 82 13 3 2 Area 2 Relationship of district to out side agencies 6o 37 2 1 Area 3 Capabilities cf district 76 17 3 2 Area k Understanding the potential scope of career education 36 20 19 U Area 5 Changes needed In the educational system 56 27 12 k Area 6 Evaluation criteria 58 32 8 2 Area 7 Committee membership 71 2k 3 1 Area 8 Barriers to successful operation 61 28 k i * 80 (3) Area 7.--Membership of the committee responsible for career education (71 percent). (4) Area 8.--Barriers to successful operation of career education (61 percent). (5) Area 2.— Relationship of district to industry,, labor, and job information sources (outside agencies) (60 percent). (6) Area 6.--Evaluation criteria for program out comes (58 percent). (7) Area 5.--Changes needed in the educational sys tem in terms of an increased level of commitment to (policy endorsement of) career education., modifications in teacher role., administrative reorgan ization, revised curriculum and instruc tional materials, and generation of new competencies for school personnel through retraining (56 percent). (8) Area 4.--Understanding the potential scope of career education (36 percent). Question 2 What areas of concern would be considered advis able for a district to investigate in determin ing the feasibility of entering into career education? Relative to the second alternative (advisable) to the statements within the broad areas of concern which should be considered prior to initiation of a feasibility study, the rank order of the eight areas, the expressions for which are abbreviated to avoid repetitiveness, as well as their corresponding percentages, were as follows: (l) Area 2.--Relation of district to outside agencies (37 percent). (2) Area 6.--Evaluation criteria (32 percent). (3) Area 8.— Barriers to successful operation (28 percent)4 (4) Area 5.--Changes needed in educational sys tem (27 percent). (5) Area 7.--Membership of the committee (24 percent). (6) Area 4.--Understanding the potential scope (20 percent)” (7) Area 3•--Capabilities of district (17 percent). (8) Area I.--Assessment of opinions and attitudes (13 percent). When the first and second alternative were com bined to yield responses that were highly or most desirable or advisable the rank order of the eight broad areas of concern were somewhat different from those associated with the answers to Question 1 and Question 2. With the excep tion of Area 4 (Understanding the potential scope of career education), which received a percentage of 56, all other areas exceeded 80 percent in the level of combined responses to the first and second alternatives. In rank order, the eight areas of concern and their corresponding percentages, which indicated a tie for the second and third cited areas, were as follows: (1) Area 2.--Relation of district to outside agencies (97 percent )4 (2) Area 1.--Assessment of opinions and attitudes (95 percent). (3) Area 7.--Membership of the committee (95 percent). 82 (4) Area 3.--Capabilities of district (93 percent). (5) Area 6.--Evaluation criteria (90 percent). (6) Area 8.— Barriers to successful operation (89 percent). (7) Area 5.--Changes needed in the educational system (83 percent). (8) Area 4.--Understanding the potential scope (56 percent)7 Question 3 What areas of concern would be unnecessary or irrelevant when a district is determining the feasibility of entering into career education? No area of concern received a percentage of response as being unnecessary or irrelevant as high as 20. In fact only two areas exceeded 10 percent of the responses for alternative 3: Area 4--Understanding the potential scope (19 percent) and Area 5--Changes needed in the educa tional system (12 percent). The other percentages may be noted in Table 3. Question 4 What areas of concern should be avoided when a district is determining the feasibility of entering into career education? With the exception of Area 4— Understanding the potential scope of career education* which 11 percent of the respondents declared should be avoided* all other broad areas of concern were at or under 4 percent in level 83 of response for the fourth alternative which indicated an avoidance reaction. Even when the third and fourth alternatives were combined the highest composite response was for Area 4-- Understanding the potential scope of career education which received only 30 percent of the responses, far ahead of the 16 percent for Area 5--Changes needed in the educational system. Only one single element or component received a combined response as high as 90 percent--namely, that a district would need to take into account that its staff would increase (Item 2e in Area 5). Discussion Prom the results presented in relation to Question A, it is apparent that since numerous elements or compo nents were judged to be highly or most desirable a single definition of career education cannot be entertained. In fact the comprehensive set of components endorsed as being highly or most desirable or advisable suggests that career education is indeed an alternative approach to the multi dimensional development of the individual. Por example, the components that career education Is Indicated for all persons, is reflected as a lifelong process from early childhood through adult life, is judged as a vehicle for developing the potential of each individual, is considered an essential means for giving particular attention in aiding an individual to prepare for intellectual decision making, and is needed by all persons were judged as highly or most desirable by a high percentage of respondents (the respective percentages being 95* 93* 93* 88, and 85). Consistent with these findings was the view that two components of career education should be avoided by per centages of 95 and 90--namely, that career education is designed for children and that career education represents a form of tracking. In general there was a high level of agreement among specialists in career education concerning which components were considered highly desirable or rele vant and those components which were considered unnecessary or Irrelevant or which should be avoided. From the information provided for Question 3* it is evident that a majority of the respondents judged each of eight major areas of concern as being highly or most desirable or advisable in determining the feasibility of entrance by a school district into a career education pro gram. Seven out of eight areas of concern received an endorsement by at least 80 percent of the 4l respondents of either advisable or highly or most desirable. Thus it would seem essential that a school district or school sys tem explore with great care many quite diversified areas of potential concern before committing itself to a program in career education. In particular, prevailing opinion and attitudes in the community need to be explored; the capabilities of the district for personnel training* orientation activities* and funding should be examined; the relationship of the school district to outside agencies should be ascertained; and the membership of a committee responsible for career education needs to be determined. Other concerns relating to evaluative criteria* existence of possible barriers to the successful operation of a career education program* and required changes in many components of the educational system also need to be studied. Finally it would appear mandatory that in plan ning a career education program* equal opportunity be afforded to both sexes as evidenced by an unanimous decla ration by the 4l respondents concerning inclusion of both males and females in any program plan. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the components or elements which should be included in a defin ition of career education and to ascertain the areas of concern that a district should investigate to determine the feasibility of entering into a career education program. Procedure In the descriptive survey approach employed, the five major steps were as follows: (a) a review of profes sional literature and related research, (b) development of the interview scale referred to as the Data Gathering Instrument, (c) validation of the instrument through the jury method, (d) structured interviews with 4l specialists including the members of the California Career Education Task Force and the directors of career education projects funded under the Vocational Education Act of 1968, and (e) an analysis of the responses. 86 87 Findings The principal results were as follows: 1. Among the definitional components or elements that the respondents declared to be highly or most desirable were that career education (a) is intended for all persons, (b) represents a life-long process extending from early child hood through adult life., (c) should provide support for developing the potential of each individual, (d) should give particular atten tion to helping the individual prepare for intellectual decision making, and (e) is needed by all persons. The percentages of career education specialists endorsing each of these five components were, respectively, 95, 93, 93, 88, and 85. 2. The respondents stated that two definitional elements or components which should be avoided were that career education (a):is designed primarily for children and (b) represents a form of tracking. The respective percentages to these two components to be avoided were 95 and 90. The eight major areas of concern that a school district should investigate to ascertain the feasibility of entering into a career education program in order of their importance as indi cated by percentage levels of endorsement by respondents as being highly desirable or most desirable were determined or identified to be (a) assessment of opinions and attitudes of relevant groups toward career education through surveys (82 percent); (b) capabilities of district for personnel training, orientation activities, and funding (76 percent); (c) membership of the committee responsible for career education (71 percent); (d) barriers to successful operation of career education program (61 percent); (e) relationship of district to industry, labor, and job information sources (60 percent); (f) evaluation criteria for program outcomes (59 percent); (g) changes needed in the educational system in terms of an increased level of commit ment to (policy endorsement of) career education, modifications in teacher role, administrative reorganization, revised curriculum and instructional materials, and generation of new competencies of school personnel through retraining (56 percent); and (h) understanding the potential scope of career education (40 percent). Conclusions From the findings the following conclusions were formulated: 1. There is no single simple definition for career education. 2. Career education represents an alternative approach to the development of the individ ual. 3. California specialists in career education would appear to be in essential agreement regarding which definitional and feasibility components would be highly or most desirable. 4. These same specialists perceive equal oppor tunity as a basic requirement of career education. 90 Recommendations The following recommendations are offered: 1. Prior to considering the implementation of a career education program., a school district should undertake a feasibility or needs assessment study. 2. The definitional and feasibility components identified in this investigation could serve as preliminary starting points for other research studies in career education. 3. The Data Gathering Instrument would appear to provide a pool of items which could be used selectively in future feasibility studies. REFERENCES REFERENCES Ayres, D. L. Implementation strategies for California school based career education., K-12. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Cali fornia, 197^. Bailey, L. J., & Stadt, R. W. Career education: New approaches to human development. Bloomington, 111.: McKnight, 1973. Bell, T. H. Career education in 197^: A view from the com missioner's desk. Paper presented to the Ohio State University, Columbus, 197^• Bennett, C. A. History of manual and industrial education up to 1870. Bloomington, 111.: The Manual Arts Press, 1926. Bennett, C. A. History of manual and Industrial education 1870 to 1917. Bloomington, 111.: The Manual Arts Press, 1926. California Career Education Task Force. Career education: A position paper on career development and preparation in California. Sacramento: California State Depart ment of Education, 197^. Career education and existing curriculum. School Shop, April 1973, 32, 86. Drucker, P. F. Management: Tasks-responsibility-practices. New York: Harper & Row, 197^* Magisos, J. H. (Ed.). Career education. Washington, D.C.: American Vocational Association, 1973- Marland, S. P., Jr. The schools' role in career develop ment. Educational Leadership, 1972, 30, 203-205. Martin, P. F. Career education in selected California high schools: A comparison of current and recommended programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer sity of Southern California, 1975. 92 93 McLea, K. R. Articulating Industrial technical education. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Indus trial Arts Associationj Miami, March 1971. McLea, K. R. Inner city industrial education. Speech given to California Industrial Education Assocation, Monterey, March 1973. Ottina, J. An introductory overview of career education. Inequality in Education, 197^, 16, 35-36. Ricketts, P. C. History of Rensselaer Polytechnic Insti tute. New York: Wiley, 1914. Silvius, G. H. & Curry, E. H. Managing multiple activi ties in Industrial education. Bloomington, 111.: McKnight & McKnight, 1971. The task force approach to career education. California School Boards Journal, June 197^, 33, 9. U.S. Department of Labor. Apprenticeship past and present, 1952. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1952. Venn, G. Man education and work. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1964. Worthington, R. Why career education? School Shop, 1973, 32, 37-39. ADDITIONAL REFERENCES ADDITIONAL REFERENCES American Association of School Administrators. Career education; A guide for school administrators" Arling ton., Va.; American Association of School Administra tors , 1972. American Vocational Association. Report of the American Vocational Association Task Force on career education. Washington, D.C.: The Association, n.d. Back to basics in the schools. Newsweek, October 1974, pp. 87-94. Baker, G-. E., & Miller, F. M. The Missouri project; Developing career education curriculum for industrial arts. Man/Society/Technology; A Journal of Industrial Arts Education, 1975^ 34, 110-111. California Education Task Force. What is career education in California? Unpublished report. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, n.d. California Industrial Education Association. A challenge: Career education for all--K through grade 14. Alhambra, Calif.: The Association, February 1972. Career Education Center. Career education model. Sheboy gan, Wis.: Career Education Center, n.d. ("ERIC Docu ment Reproduction Service No. ED 073 251) Darcy, R. L. Economics and career education. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 11-18. Deegan, W. L., & Schroeder, W. P. (Eds.). Career educa tion in practice. A monograph. Burlingame, Calif.: Association of California School Administrators and the California Junior College Association, February 1974. Hanleigh, M., & Saxe, A. A goal and careers planning course. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 65-66. Heitzmann, R., & Staropoll, C. A multi-disciplinary approach. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 27-32. 95 Hoyt, K. B. The concept of career education. Guidance Newsletter, September-October, 1972. Hoyt, K. B. Common sense about career education. Guidance Newsletter, September-October, 1973. Hoyt, K. B. Parents and career education. Guidance News letter, January-February, 1974. Hoyt, K. B. Straight answers on career education. Today1s Education, January 1975> pp. 60-62. Hoyt, K. B., Evans, R. N., Mackin, E. R., & Mangum, G. L. Career education; What it is and how to do it. Salt Lake City: Olympus Publishing, 1972. Kane, P. W. Career education, some thoughts and implica tions. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 41-42. Kansas State Department of Education. The Kansas guide for career education. Topeka, Kansas: Kansas State Department of Education, 1973* (ERIC Document Repro duction Service No. ED 080 706) Kaufman, J. J. Career education: A new approach? Inequality in Education, 1974, 16, 42-46. Law, C. J., Jr. Career education works. Educational Leadership, 1972, 30, 225-228. Law, G. F. Strategies for change through career education. Inequality in Education, 1974, 16, 37-41. Mannebach, A. J. A system for installing career education at the local level. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, March 1973- (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 085 592) McClure, L., & Buan, C. (Eds.). Essays on career educa tion. Portland, Oregon: Northwest Regional Educa- tional Laboratory, 1973* McLeod, P. Career education. Man/Society/Technology: A Journal of Industrial Arts Education, 1972, 31, 214- 2TT- Miller, W. C. Career education and the curriculum leader. The Education Digest, 1973.. 3£* 48-50. 97 Mitchell, E. What about career education for girls? Educational Leadership, 1972, 30, 233-236. Moore, E. J. Career development: A new focus. Educa tional Leadership, 1972, 30* 257-260. Ohanneson, G. Finding, preparing and deploying teachers for career education. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 19-25. Parsley, J. F., Jr. Career education and the social stu dies: Hocus, focus, or locus? Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 5-10. Pautler, J. J. Occupational education in career develop ment. Educational Leadership, 1972, 30, 237-240. Peters, P. N., Santora, F., & McGhee, J. Career educa tion: An overview of California state level activities. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), 45-48. Phelps, A. L. A descriptive overview of the cluster-based occupationaT~~curriculum model. Mount Pleasant: Voca tional Education/Special Education Project, Central Michigan University, November 1972. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 073 252) Reinhart, B. A comprehensive career education model: A bridge between school and work. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southwide Research Coordinating Council, Clearwater, Florida, May 1972. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 065 690) Ressler, R. Career education. Worthington, Ohio: Charles A. Jones, 1973- Robertson, V. H. (Ed.). Guidelines for the seventies. Chicago: American Technical Society, 1967• Ryan, W. W. Career education: A handbook of funding resources. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin, 1974. Smoker, D. Career education. Arlington, Va.: National Schools Public Relations Association, 1974. Steeb, R. V. The role of industrial arts in career educa tion. Man/Society/Technology: A Journal of Industrial Arts Education, 1972, 31, 2o0-265. 98 ; Strohmenger, C. T., & Henderson, H. L. Career develop ment: Pandora's box or cornucopia? Educational Leader ship, 1972, 30, 261-263. 1 Strong, M. T. A career education program based on educa- | tional psychology. Social Studies Review, 1974, 12(4), j 37-40. ; 1 Thomas, W. G. (Ed.). Educational horizons. Bloomington, 111.: Educational Press Association of America, 1973- 1 West Virginia State Department of Education. A guide for j the development of career education. Charleston: West Virginia State Department of Education, June 1972. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 073 253) Wilkie, L. A. Your life in the machine world. Des Plaines, 111.: The DoAll Co., 194b. A P P E N D I C E S 99 APPENDIX A LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA EDUCATION TASK FORCE PAUL N. PETERS, MANAGER KENNETH DENSLEY, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH FRANK SANTORO, CAREER EDUCATION TASK FORCE 100 WILSON BILES S uperintendent of P ublic Instruction a n d Director of Education STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATE EDUCATION BUILDING. 721 CAPITOL MALL, SACHAMENTO 95914 April S, 1974 Mr. Kenneth R. McLea Mr. John J. Grimes 1750 - 45th Avenue San Francisco, California 94122 Gentlemen: Thank you for your recent letter. I would be pleased to have you come to the office in the near future to further discuss your study. As you might be aware, we are already working with several students from the University of Southern California. Career Education Task Force (916) 445-2575 PNP:db 101 12 Novem ber 1974 Dr. Kenneth Dens ley Director of Research Career Education Task Force 721 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Dr. Densley: Earlier this year while preparing for our doctoral dissertation proposal in Career Education at the University of Southern California, we consulted with Mr. Paul Peters. It was our desire in seeking Mr. Peters counsel that our research might be relevant and usefhl to those districts considering the implementation of a career education program. Having successfully completed the written and oral aspects of the Qualification Examinations, and having been admitted to candidacy, we are anxious to begin with our research. In speaking to Mr, Peters, on November 11, 1974, he mentioned that his office would be interested in the study outlined and requested that we forward to you a revised copy of the proposal. We will appreciate meeting with you and hope that we may be of assistance in furthering Career Education programs. Yours truly, John J. Grimes Kenneth R. McLea Ken's home can be reached daily at the following number C415) 731-8392. C1750-45th Avenue San Francisco, CA 94122) cc: Paul Peters Dr. Leonard Murdy, U. S. C. Enclosure: Revised dissertation proposal 103 WILSON RILES Superintendent ot Public Xnitruetion an d Director o! Education STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATE EDUCATION BUILDING, 721 CAPITOL MALL, SACRAMENTO 95814 January 30, 1975 Both Nationally, and here In California, Career Education has been recognized as a viable instrument for change in education. The Superintendent of California Schools has placed a high priority on the development of this concept. Much work has been done to develop materials for career education, however, much work remains to be done. This letter will serve as an introduction for John J. Grimes and Kenneth R, McLea, doctorial candidates at the University of Southern California, who are conducting a study entitled "An Analysis of Career Education Programs in California as a Basis for Developing a Comprehensive Feasibility Model for Administrators", As Manager of the Career Education Task Force, 1 support the purpose of their study and recommend that you cooperate with these gentlemen by providing your valuable time in responding to the interviews they will be requesting of you. Mr. Grimes or Mr. McLea will contact you requesting your participation in collecting data pertinent to the study. Your cooperation and assistance will be appreciated. Sincerely, Paul N. Peters, Manager Career Education Task Force (916) 445-2575 PNPsjf 104 WILSON RILES S u p erin ten d en t of P ublic Instruction a n d D irector of E ducation STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATE EDUCATION BUILDING, 721 CAPITOL MALL, SACRAMENTO 85914 February 17, 1975 Mr. John Grimes Mr. Kenneth McLea 1750 45th Avenue San Francisco, California 94122 Gentlemen: On behalf of the Career Education Task Force, I would like to invite you to Sacramento on February 24, The purpose of this visit is to share your dissertation design and review your career education questionnaire with us. I feel it would be most beneficial to all concerned to make this a joint effort so that the staff could give you direct input. Please advise me if this date is satisfactory. We look forward to meeting with you both. Sincerely, ' • / ' • Frank Santoro, Ed.D Career Education Task Force (916) 445-2575 FS:Jf I 105 19 February 1975 Mr. Paul Peters, Manager Career Education Task Force 721 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Mr. Peters: As California Educators and doctoral candidates at the University of Southern California we are pleased that Frank Santoro invited us to be on the Career Education Task Force Agenda, and we are looking forward to meeting with you at 9:30 a.m., 24 February 1975. Enclosed is a copy of the Problem Statement and the Data Gathering Instrument to which we request you respond. We will be available for clarification and questions concerning any of the statements, however, in order to maintain research validity, we request that you respond to each statement as it is written. Recognizing that your agenda time is extremely valuable we realize that you may wish to respond to our Data Gathering Instrument prior to the meeting. We will make every effort to stress brevity, and are very appreciative to have indiv iduals of your expertise included in our study. Individual responses will remain anonymous. enclosures: Problem Statement Data Gathering Instrument Dr. Kenneth Densley Director of Research 19 February 1975 California Career Education Task Force 721 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Ken: We wish to thank you for making the arrangements in order that we might meet with the Career Education Task Force at 9 30 a.m. on 24 February 1975. Their expertise will be an extremely valuable asset to our research project. We also wish to express our appreciation to you for allowing us to use the room in your building to schedule our 11 a.m. meeting with the Career Education leaders in the Sacramento area. Your assistance in helping us put together our study population is-greatly appreciated by us both and has made that part of the project run very smoothly. We hope that you and Joan (I promised Joan that we owed her a lunch for her part) will be our guest at lunch after the 11 a.m. meeting. 107 Dr. Frank Santoro, Project Specialist California Career Education Task Force 19 February 1975 721 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA. 95814 Dear Dr. Santoro: We wish to express our appreciation for the invitation to appear before the Career Education Task Force, and are looking forward to meeting you at Q:30 a.m. on 24 February 1975. Enclosed is a copy of the Problem Statement and the Data Gathering Instrument to which we request you respond. We will be available for clarification and questions concerning any of the statements, however, in order to maintain research validity, we request that you respond to each statement as it is written. Recognizing that your agenda time is extremely valuable we realize that you may wish to respond to our Data Gathering Instrument prior to the meeting. We will make every effort to stress brevity, and are very appreciative to have individuals of your expertise included in our study. Individual responses will remain anonymous. Sincerely, 'errne th R. enclosures: Problem Statement Data Gathering Instrument APPENDIX B VALIDATION JURY QUESTIONNAIRE AND CORRESPONDENCE 108 LETTER TO VALIDATION JURY 23 January 1975 Dear Great interest is being generated for Career Education nationally as well as in California. We are preparing a doctoral study entitled " An Analysis of Career Education in California as a Basis for Determining Definition and Feasibility Components" and recognizing your knowledge and interest in this area we are asking that you assist us in validating our Data Gathering Instrument. The instrument will be used in a structured interview with the Directors and Coordinators of Career Education pro grams in California. As per our telephone conversation we will be mailing you the Data Gathering Instrument prior to our meeting on 30 January 1975. The meeting will convene at Treasure Island in the Officer's Club at 6:30 p.m. for dinner. Following the dinner we will gather for the critique. Please show this letter to the guard at the gate for admit* tance. The assistance we desire from the jury is threefold: 1. Judge the instrument as to its form and accuracy. 2. Judge each item as to its applicability toward career education. 3. Add to any area we may have overlooked and/or strike any ambiguous statements now included. We wish to thank you for your cooperation and assistance and look forward to seeing you on the evening of the 30th. Sincerely, Kenneth R. McLea § John J. Grimes Please fill out the "Validation Jury Questionnaire" that is enclosed. 109 WILSON RILES Superintendent of Public Instruction a n d D irecto r of E ducation STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATE EDUCATION BUILDING, 721 CAPITOL MALL, SACRAMENTO 95814 January 23, 1975 Mr. John Grimes Mr. Kenneth McLea 1750 45th Avenue San Francisco, California 94122 Dear John and Ken: Enclosed for your review, recommendations and/or approval, please find a copy of a proposed letter of introduction in connection with the interviews you will conduct during your career education research project. If the letter does not require changes you may duplicate as necessary. If charges are required, please return for signature. Be sure to obtain written clearance from the appropriate state, county or district superintendent before sending questionnaires or interview appointment requests to individuals. This is not only a courtesy, but in many districts a requirement. I wish you continued success in your endeavor. Sincerely yours, Kenneth Densley Consultant Career Education Task Force (916) 445-2575 110 KD: jf Enclosure _ _ - i: L i LETTER OF APPRECIATION TO VALIDATION JURY 2 February 1975 Dear We wish to express our appreciation to you for serving on the validation Jury for our Career Education Data Gathering Instrument. Your expertise and cooperation were of invaluable assistance to the completion of the data gathering instrument. It is our hope that the findings from our study will be of benefit to school districts attempting to assist youth through career education. Again, we wish to thank you for sacrificing your valuable time to meet with us. Sincerely, Kenneth R. McLea 3 John J. Grimes i 112 VALIDATION JURY QUESTIONNAIRE Name Date Address______________________________________________ Phone Company or organization _____________________________________ Area of specialization Admin. ____ Teaching Research Other(please specify) _______________ Brief personal history: 1 Please state briefly what your expertise and/or interest is in Career Education: I I t State why you think Career Education is important. i This information will be included in our research report, therefore, it is voluntary. 113 THIS IS THE DATA GATHERING INSTRUMENT WHICH WILL BE USED BY THE RESEARCHERS IN STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS WITH THE DIRECTORS AND COORDINATORS OF CAREER EDUCATION IN CALIFORNIA. WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUDGE THE INSTRUMENT BEFORE OUR MEETING. PLEASE BRING THE INSTRUMENT AND THE 'VALIDATION JURY QUESTIONNAIRE’ ’™ THE TREASURE ISLAND MEETING ON 30 JANUARY 1R75. YOUR NAME WILL BE ON A LIST AT THE MAIN GATE FOR ENTRANCE ONTO TREASURE ISLAND. THE MEETING IS BEING HELD AT THE ADMIRAL NIMITZ CLUB. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. CAREER EDUCATION STUDY " KENNETH R. MCLEA AND JOI-it' ). GRIMES CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION - page l d i r e c t i o n s : i n d i c a t e y o u r r e a c t i o n t o e a c h s t a t e m e n t b y c h e c k i n g i n . t h e b o x UNDER THE APPROPRIATE HEADING. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN OPINION OF THE EFFECT A COMPONENT MAY HAVE UPON THE D E F IN IT IO N / NO REACTION I S NECESSARY, LEGEND! i . HIGHLY DESIRABLE ~ WITHOUT T H IS COMPONENT, THE D EFIN ITION. WOULD F A IL OR BE LESS THAN ADEQUATE. 2* ADVISABLE ~ T H IS COMPONENT WILL A ID THE D E F IN IT IO N . 3 - UNNECESSARY - NOT A REQUIRED COMPONENT FOR T H IS D E F IN IT IO N . AVOID - T H IS COMPONENT WILL HINDER THE D E F IN IT IO N . QUESTION A: WHAT ARE THE COMPONENTS TO A DEFINITION OF CAREER EDUCATION ? 1. CAREER EDUCATION IS A LIFELONG PROCESS THAT EXTENDS FROM 1 2 EARLY CHILDHOOD THROUGH ADULT LIFE- ............. 0 D Q a. CAREER EDUCATION IS A WAY OF THINKING. ........... Q Q 0 3. CAREER EDUCATION IS A SUPPORTING INSTRUMENT FOR FORMAL LEARNING 0 a D ‘ f. CAREER EDUCATION IS DESIGNED PRIMARILY FOR CHILDREN OF THE MIDDLE AND WORKING CLASSES. ....... 0 a D 5. ALL EDUCATION MUST BE REFORMULATED AROUND CAREER EDUCATION, 0. 0 Q b. CAREER EDUCATION IS TO PREPARE YOUTH AND ADULTS FOR PRODUCTIVE AND REWARDING LIVES 0 D □ 7. CAREER EDUCATION.IS TO CONDITION PEOPLE TO A LIFE IN THE MARKET PLACE 0 o q B. CAREER EDUCATION IS A PHILOSOPHIC CONCEPT 0 D D R. CAREER EDUCATION IS A SPECIFIC SET OF PROGRAMS 0 0 0 10. CAREER EDUCATION MAY BE THOUGHT OF AS AN APPROACH TO TEACHING, COUNSELING AND LEARNING 0 0 0 11. CAREER EDUCATION GIVES PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO HELPING THE INDIVIDUAL PREPARE FOR INTELLIGENT DECISION MAKING- . 0 0 0 115 QiECK SHEET KIR JUW VALIDATMI - PAGE 2 J S — a n m W1 > HjJ Q 3X 3 C 1 2 3 > f IE. CAREER EDUCATION IS TO REDUCE THE EMPLOYMENT RATE. . Q O O O 13. CAREER EDUCATION IS AN EARLY ORIENTATION TO THE WORLD OF WORK..................................... 0 0 0 0 14-. CAREER EDUCATION IS LEARNING CONCERNING OCCUPATIONAL CLUSTERS............................................0 0 Q 0 15. CAREER EDUCATION IS LEARNING CONCERNING CAREER LADDERS 0 0 0 0 lb. CAREER EDUCATION STRESSES SELF ASSESSMENT 0 0 0 0 17- CAREER EDUCATION IS A CONCEPT WHICH INVOLVES THE PAr« i iCIPATION OF INDUSTRY......................... 0 0 0 0 18. CAREER EDUCATION IS ROOTED IN THE PRESENT OR NEAR FUTURE........................................... 0 0 0 0 1R. CAREER EDUCATION IS TO GET PEOPLE INTO JOBS D D Q D 2D. CAREER EDUCATION INVOLVES OCCUPATIONAL DECISION MAKING............................................. D □ 0 0 21* CAREER EDUCATION FOSTERS OCCUPATIONAL SKILLS. ... a D D 0 ^d. CAREER EDUCATION IS TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH PROGRAMS IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATIO 1 1 ..................Q 0 0 0 23. CAREER EDUCATION FOSTERS ATTITUDES CONDUCIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF OCCUPATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY............Q □ Q 0 21 !* CAREER EDUCATION IS INTENDED FOR ALL PEOPLE - . . . Q a Q Q 25. CAREER EDUCATION IS NEEDED BY ALL PEOPLE.............Q Q a D 2b- CAREER EDUCATION SHOULD PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR DEVELOPING THE POTENTIAL OF EACH INDIVIDUAL 0 □ □ 0 27. CAREER EDUCATION IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL AND GENERAL ABILITIES TO HELP INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS OBTAINr HOLD AND ADVANCE IN A JOB OR SERIES OF JOBS CONSTITUTING A CAREER.................Q Q a □ 28. CAREER EDUCATION PROVIDES PROGRESS ALONG A PATHWAYr NOT ARRIVAL AT A DESTINATION..................... Q □ Q Q UNNECESSARY 116 CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION - PAGE 3 y y ---------------------------------------------- vSS _i at i/> I H H 0 W> H LI Q 1 Q < ER. CAREER EDUCATION IS A WAY OF PERcIEVING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE WORLD OF LEARNING AND THE WORLD OF WORK- . 0 0 0 0 30. CAREER EDUCATION INVOLVES ALL EDUCATORS 0 D 0 0 31. CAREER EDUCATION IS A COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM FOCUSING STRICTLY ON CAREERS 0 0 0 D 32. CAREER EDUCATION PROVIDES A BROAD APPROACH TO PREPARA TION FOR CITIZENSHIP Q 0 0 0 33. CAREER EDUCATION PROVIDES A BROAD APPROACH TO PREPARATION FOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT.................... □ 0 0 0 3Y. CAREER EDUCATION PROVIDES A BROAD APPROACH TO PREPARATION FOR AN AVOCATION..................................... 0 0 Q 0 35. CAREER EDUCATION STRESSES INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION. 0 0 0 Q 3b. CAREER EDUCATION IN GRADES K THROUGH IS IS ARTICULATED AT EACH GRADE LEVEL................................. Q □ 0 0 37. CAREER EDUCATION IS A CONCEPT WHICH INVOLVES THE PARTICIPATION OF THE COMMUNITY □ Q 0 □ 38. LIST BELOW OTHER CONCEPTS OF CAREER EDUCATION THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN A DEFINITION. UNNECESSARY 117 CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION - PAGE A ] QUESTION B! WHAT AREAS MUST A DISTRICT INVESTIGATE TO DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY : OF OTTERING INTO A CARER EDUCATION PROGRAM. ; 1. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY INCLUDES SURVEYING CERTAIN GROUPS TO ASCERTAIN THEIR FEELINGS TOWARD CAREER EDUCATION. A. ADMINISTRATORS ................. .........h B a a B. COMMUNITY....................... □ 0 G C. PARENTS ....................... □ 0 □ D. STUDENTS ....................... Q □ □ E. TEACHERS ....................... 0 D □ F. TEACHER ASSOCIATIONS ............ □ □ 0 G. OTHERS.......................................... 2. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY INVOLVES ANALYZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS RELATIONSHIP WITH INDUSTRY.................. 0 0 0 □ 3. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY INVOLVES ANALYZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS RELATIONSHIP WITH LABOR...................... □ 0 □ 0 ¥. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY INVOLVES ANALYZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS RELATIONSHIP WITH JOB INFORMATION SOURCES- . □ □ 0 □ S. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY INVOLVES ANALYZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS UNDERSTANDING THAT CAREER EDUCATION IS A TOTAL SOCIAL SYSTEM IN WHICH EACH OF THE SUB SYSTEMS— ADMINISTRATORS, TEACHERS, STUDENTS AND PARENTS— COME TO A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF THE GOAL AND PROCESSES OF EDUCATION AND THE ROLE THAT EACH GROUP PLAYS IN THE TOTAL SYSTEM.................................... 0 0 0 0 b. A COMMITTEE WHICH HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY SHOULD INCLUDE A. ON-SITE ADMINISTRATORS.......................□ Q 0 Q B. DISTRICT SUPERVISOR OF CURRICULUM........... □ 0 0 □ C. SUPERVISOR OF INDUSTRIAL ARTS/VOCATIONAL ED. . Q 0 D D D. SUPERVISOR OF COUNSELING & GUIDANCE Q Q 0 0 (1. HIGHLY DESIRA BLE ~ 2. ADVISABLE ~ 3. UNNECESSARY - H, AVOID) CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION „ PAGE 5 CO _ UJ < Q 3 « M O Q X _ LU * - * " ® p CONTINUATION OF QUESTION NUMBER b 5 § 5 ? E. SUPERVISORS OF ACADEMIC AREAS................. 0 0 □ 0 F- BOARD OF EDUCATION........................... □ Q 0 D G. SUPERINTENDENT............................... □ 0 0 0 H. TEACHERS..................................... 0 D 0 0 I. TEACHER ASSOCIATIONS 0 D Q 0 J. COUNSELORS 0 0 0 0 K. STUDENTS..................................... D 0 D □ L. COMMUNITY................................... Q Q 0 0 M- INDUSTRY..................................... 0 □ 0 D N. REPRESENTATIVES FROM ROC/ROP.................. 0 □ 0 D O- COMMUNITY COLLEGE........................... □ 0 0 □ P- f YEAR COLLEGE/UNIVERSITY.................. 0 D Q 0 Q- OTHERS__________________________ A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY RECOGNIZES CERTAIN BARRIERS TOWARD A CAREER EDUCATION PROGRAM. A. LACK OF COMMITTMENT FROM EDUCATORS.............0 0 □ □ B- MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE CONCEPT................. 0 Q 0 D C- DIVISION BETWEEN OCCUPATIONAL ANu ACADEMIC EDUCATION.................................. Q □ Q Q D. RELUCTANCE OF LOCAL LEADERSHIP-INITIATIVE FROM THE BOARD OF EDUCATION.................... 0 D D 0 E. LACK OF PLANNING SKILLS.......................G D 0 □ F- LACK OF POSITIVE RESPONSE TO OCCUPATIONAL EDUCATION.....................................0 0 G 0 G. OTHERS______________________________________________________ 119 CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION - PAGE 6 8- A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY RECOGNIZES THAT A DISTRICT MUST HAVE THE CAPABILITIES TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: 1 2 3 * A- IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR DISTRICT PERSONNEL. . . D 0 Q □ B. IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR ON-SITE PERSONNEL ... 0 0 D 0 R. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY RECOGNIZES THAT A DISTRICT MUST HAVE THE CAPABILITIES TO PROVIDE ORIENTATION FOR A. COMMUNITY..................................0 0 0 0 B. INDUSTRY................................. 0 0 0 0 C. O T H E R S ____________________________________________ 10. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT IS REALISTIC RECOGNIZES THAT A CAREER EDUCATION PROGRAM WILL BE PLANNED TO INCLUDE A. MALES ................................ 0 □ Q B. FEMALES.............................. 0 D D C. BOT H................................ Q 0 □ A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY RECOGNIZES THAT THE ROLE OF THE TEACHER MUST CHANGE......................... 0 □ 0 12. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT A DISTRICT'S FACILITIES MUST INCREASE BY - CHECK ONE ONLY A. WILL NOT INCREASE ................. D 0 0 B. INCREASE BY 5 PER CENT ............. 0 0 a C. INCREASE BY 10 PER CENT ............ 0 □ 0 D. INCREASE BY 20 PER CENT ............ 0 D 0 E. INCREASE BY OVER 20 PER CENT ........ □ 0 0 13. A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY,A DISTRICT WILL BE REQUIRED TO COOPERATE AND COMMUNICATE WITH THE UNIVERSITY TEACHER TRAINING PROGRAMS. D 0 0 0 I*. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THE DISTRICT RECOGNIZES THAT CAREER EDUCATION WILL BE REQUIRED OF ALL STUDENTS REGARDLESS OF INDIVIDUAL GOALS........ 0 0 a Q IS. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY A DISTRICT RECOGNIZES THAT IT WILL HAVE TO LOOK TOWARD PREVIOUSLY NON-CREDENTIALED PERSONS WHO ARE EMPLOYED IN INDUSTRY □ 0 D 0 120 CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION - PAGE 7 lb. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THAT CAREER EDUCATION PROGRAMS BEGIN IN — A. EVERY SCHOOL IN THE DISTRICT SIMULTANEOUSLY. . B. ONE SCHOOL AT A TIME ........................ C. ONE LEVEL AT A TIME - I.E. K-b.?-B,S-12 . . - D. OTHER _______________________________________ 1?. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY A DISTRICT MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT A DISTRICTS TEACHING STAFF WILL INCREASE D D 0 □ 18. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY A DISTRICT MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE PREDICTIONS OF FUTURE MANPOWER NEEDS. . . 0 0 0 0 IS. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY A DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THAT CAREER EDUCATION WILL REACH MANY STUDENTS FORMALLY UNEXPOSED TO THE USUAL VOCATIONAL OFFERINGS.................... 0 □ Q Q 2D- IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THE DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THE PROGRAM WILL REQUIRE FORMAL ENDORSEMENT BY THOSE DETERMINING......POLICY........................... 0 0 0 0 21. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THE DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THAT IF THE PROGRAM IS TO SUCCEED THE FOLLOWING CHANGES MUST BE MADE: A. TEXTBOOKS MUST BE REVISED................. □ □ 0 0 B. CURRICULUM GUIDES MUST BE REVISED 0 0 Q 0 C. TEACHERS RETRAINED.................... 0 0 0 0 D- ADMINISTRATORS RETRAINED................. 0 □ 0 0 E. ACTIVITIES REPLANNED □ 0 Q D 22. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THE DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THE FOLLOWING ADMINISTRATIVE AREAS WILL BE REORGANIZED. A. NON-INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT PERSONNEL - . . □ 0 0 B. RESEARCH SUPPORT ....................... □ 0 0 C. EVALUATION SUPPORT .................... . 0 Q 0 D. GUIDANCE .............................. ■ □ 0 a E. OTHERS 23- IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THE DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THE COMMUNITY'S ABILITY TO FUND THE PROGRAM..............Q Q D D 121 CHECK SHEET FOR JURY VALIDATION - PAGE 8 an-. IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY THE DISTRICT MUST RECOGNIZE THE SOCIAL STATUS OF THE COMMUNITY................. 0 0 0 0 2S- IN A CAREER EDUCATION FEASIBILITY STUDY A DISTRICT SHOULD BE PREPARED TO PLAN ON THE EVALUATION OF THE DEVISED PROGRAM AS PER THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: A. STUDENTS RESPECT FOR WORK................... □ 0 G □ B. SKILLS FOR EMPLOYMENT....................... D 0 a 0 C. STUDENTS AWARENESS FOR CAREER OPPORTUNITIES. . 0 0 0 a D. STRONGER SCHOOL TIES WITH INDUSTRY.......... Q a □ 0 E. STRONGER SCHOOL TIES WITH LABOR ............ Q □ □ O F. STRONGER SCHOOL TIES WITH JOB INFORMATION CENTERS.................................... 0 0 0 0 G. KNOWLEDGE OF OCCUPATIONAL CLUSTERS AND CAREER LADDERS.................................... □ 0 □ □ H. STUDENT ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY ........ Q □ □ □ I. STUDENTS RESPECT FOR LAW AND AUTHORITY .... □ 0 □ □ J. STUDENTS ABILITY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES........................ D □ □ 0 PLEASE ADD ANY ITEM WHICH YOU THINK SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS FEASIBILITY STUDY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION- PLEASE BRING THIS COPY WITH YOU THE EVENING OF 30TH JANUARY. APPENDIX C OUTLINE OF THE STUDY PROBLEM AND A RESEARCH PROJECT DATA GATHERING INSTRUMENT 122 a dissertation research by Kenneth R, McLea f j John J. Grimes. BASIC DIFFICULTY CAreer Education has caught the interest of many educators in the country, but in so doing each educator has developed a "personalized" definition as to the role and scope career education should play in the educational system. If the role and scope can be determined through research of on-going programs in Career Education then an outcome would be the development of a feasibility model for use by school districts to determine if Career Education will ful fill its role and cover the scope and aspects of a good educational system for which it was designed. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .The problem of this investigation was formulated in terms of the following questions: 1. What are the most desirable components or elements which should be included in a definition of Career Education? 2. What are the components or elements considered advisable and may be j included in a definition of Career Education? 3. What components or elements are considered unnecessary or irrelevant in a definition of Career Education? 4. What components or elements should be avoided in a definition of Career Education? 5. What areas are the most desirable for a district to investigate in determining the feasibility of entering into Career Education? 6. What areas are advisable for a district to investigate in determining the feasibility of entering into Career Education? 7. What areas are unnecessary or irrelevant when a district is determining the feasibility of entering into Career Education? 8. What areas should be avoided when a district is determining the feasibility of entering into Career Education? DESIGN AND PROCEDURE The methodology employed for this study is that of the descriptive survey approach, utilizing structured personal interviews and a questionnaire. The survey includes areas in California having Career Education programs. Selection of the study popula tion was carefully exercised to guard against bias. A jury of specialists know ledgeable and interested in fostering Career Education was selected to validate the data gathering instrument (questionnaire). The study population was limited to the list of names provided by the State of California, Department of Education. 123 124 ! A questionnaire was designed to ascertain which of the aspects in Career Education I could be classified as essential "aspects." This questionnaire will be administered! to the study population. Interviews will be conducted with the Career Education leaders in California to ascertain the essential qualities to determine feasibility. Specific information will be requested and recorded on the data gathering instrument. DELIMITATIONS The study is delimited to the leaders in Career Education and administrators in selected school districts in California. The study is delimited to Career Education programs in Grades K through 12 and to areas vital to career education. The one exception made in the study is that of finance, which will not be included. 125 1 A RESEARCH PROJECT DATA GATHERING INSTRUMENT for a dissertation entitled An Analysis of the Perceptions of Career Education Specialists in California as a Basis for Determining Definitional and Feasibility Components of Career Education UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BY KENNETH R. MCLEA and JOHN J. GRIMES Career Education study - K enneth R. Me Lea and John J. Qrimes 126 Page 1 i Directions: Indicate y o u r reaction to each statem ent by checking In th e box under the appropriate heading. If you do n o t have an opinion concerning any of the statem ents, no reaction is necessary. Legend: 1. HIGHLY or MOST D ESIRA BLE » w ithout this com ponent or elem ent, the definition of Career Education w ould 'ail or be less than adequate. 2. ADVISABLE -- this co m p o n en t or elem ent will aid the definition of Career Education. 3. UNNECESSA RY or IR R E LE V A N T -- not a required co m p o n e n t or elem ent for a definition of Career Education. 4. AVOID or D ETR IM EN TA L -- this com ponent or element will hinder the definition of Career Education, Q u e stio n A W H A T A R E T H E C O M P O N E N T S O R E L E M E N T S T O A D E F IN IT IO N O F C A R E E R E D U C A T IO N ? - 1 2 3 4 1. Career E d u c a tio n is a. a lifelong process that extends from early childhood through adult life. [I [I [] ( b. a point of view. (I [I II I c. a supporting Instrument for forma! learning [] II [I I d. designed primarily for children of middle and working class [] [1 [1 [ e. to prepare youth and adults for productive and rewarding lives.............................................[] [] [] I f. to condition people to a life in the world of work..................................................................... El (1 [] t g. a philosophic concept....................................................................................................................... El [] El E h. a specific set of programs............................................................................................................... El II El E i. an early orientation to the world of work El (1 (1 E j. learning concerned with occupational clusters............................................................................El [1 El E k. learning concerned with career ladders.......................................................................................... (1 El (I ( I. a concept which involves the participation of Industry.........................................................El [] [] [ m. is rooted in the present or near future ................. El El El E n. designed to place people into jobs...................................................................................................El El El I o. to be associated with programs in vocational education.................................................. [] [] [] [ p. intended for all people El El El t q. needed by all people E l El El I r. the development of special and general abilities to help individuals and groups obtain, hold and advance in a job or series of jobs constituting a career.................... El El (1 E s. a way of perceiving the relationship between the world of learning and the world of work El El El E Career Education -- Me Lea & Grimes Career Education it t. a comprehensive educational program focusing strictly on occupations.................... u.a concept that involves the participation of the community. ..................................... v. a form of tracking........................................................................................................................ w. a concept which involves the participation of trade unions........................................... 2. All education must be reformulated around Career Education. .................................................. 3. Career Education may be thought of at an approach to teaching, counseling and learning.. . . 4. Career Education gives particular attention to helping the individual prepare for intelligent decision making................................................................................................................................ 5. Career Education affords a meant to reduce the unemployment rate........................................... 6. Career Education involves occupational decision making...................................................................... 7 . Career Education fosters occupational skills.............................................................................................. 8. Career Education is to be associated with programs in vocational education................................ 9. Career Education fosters attitudes conducive to the acceptance of occupational responsibility........................................................................................................................................................ 10. Career Education should provide support for developing the potential of each individual... 11. Career Education provides progress along a pathway, not arrival at a destination...................... 12. Career Education provides a broad approach to preparation for citizenship................................. 13. Career Education provides a broad approach to preparation for career development............... 14. Career Education provides a broad approach to preparation for an avocation............................ 15. Career Education in grades K through 12 is articulated, horizontally and vertically, at each grade level............................................................................................................................................. 16. Career Education stresses individualized instruction.............................................................................. 17. List below other concepts of Career Education that should be included in a definition. Page 2 2 3 127 4 Career Education - McLea & Grimes Page 3 Legend for Question B: 1. HIGHLY OR MOST DESIRA BLE — w ith o u t this com ponent or elem ent Career Education w ould n o t be feasible. 2. ADVISABLE — this com ponent or elem ent will aid in making Career Education feasible. 3. UNNECESSA RY or IR R E LE V A N T — n o t a required com ponent or elem ent which w ould make Career Education feasible. 4. AVOID -- this co m p o n en t or elem ent should not be considered in determ ining the feasibility of Career Education. Q U E S T IO N B: W H A T A R E A S M U S T A D IS T R IC T IN V E S T IG A T E T O D E T E R M IN E T H E F E A S IB IL IT Y O F E N T E R I N G IN T O A C A R E E R E D U C A T IO N P R O G R A M . 1. A Career E ducation feasibility study a. includes surveying certain groups to ascertain their feelin gtow ard Career E ducation. 128 2. C o m m u n ity 7. Business c o m m u n it y ....................................................................... 8. Trade u n io n s....................................................................................... 9. O thers___________________________________________________ b. involves analyzing the sch ool districts relationship with industry. c. involves analyzing the school districts relationship with labor. . . . d. involves analyzing the sch ool districts relationship with job infor- e. involves analyzing the sch ool districts understanding that Career Education is a total social system in w hich each o f the tub system s - adm inistrators, teachers, students and parents - c o m e to a c o m m o n understanding o f the goal and process of education and the role that 1 2 3 4 [] [] [] (] [I (1 0 1) [I [] [] [] [] n [] [J n [] n [] [i ti [] 11 [] [i n (1 n [] [] [1 [] [] [) [) u n n [J [] [] [] 0 [] [] [] [] ring [] [] [] N (1 [] [] 11 Career Education — McLea & Grimes Page 4 129 A Career E d u ca tio n fea sib ility s tu d y ^ 2 g. reco g n izes th a t a d istrict m ust have th e capabilities to provide o r ie n ta tio n fo r 1. c o m m u n i t y ............................................................................................................. 1 2. in d u str y ..................................................................................................................... ( 3. trade u n io n s .,.............................................................................................................[ 4. pa ren ts............................................................................................................................I 5. others — -- --------------------------------------------- h. th at is realistic reco g n izes that a Career E d u ca tio n program w ill be plan ned to inclu de 1. m a les............................................................................................................................ [ 2. fe m a le s ...................................................................................... [ 3. b o th ...................................................................................................................................[ i. reco g n izes th a t the role o f the te a ch er m u st c h a n g e ............................................ I j. takes in to a c c o u n t th e fa c t that a district's fa cilities 1. will in c re a se ............................................................................................................ i 2. will n o t increase.................................................................................................. t 2. In a C areer E d u ca tio n feasibility stu d y a. a district will be required to c o o p e r a te and c o m m u n ic a te w ith th e un iversity teach er training p rogram s................................................................................. I b. the d istrict reco g n izes th a t Career E du cation w ill b e required o f all s tu d e n ts regardless o f individual goals. . ............................................................... [ c . a district recognizes th a t it will ha v e to look to w a r d p reviou sly n o n -cred en tia led p e r so n s w h o are e m p lo y e d in in d u str y ................................ [ d . a d istrict must r eco g n ize that if th e program is t o be su cc e ssfu l it m u st be 1. every sc h o o l in the d istrict sim u lta n e o u s ly ................................... [ 2. o n e sc h o o l at a t im e ....................................................................................... [ 3. o n e level at a tim e (K-6,7 -8 ,9 - 1 2 ) ......................................................... [ 4. a tten d a n ce area.................................................................................................... [ 5. o th e r s----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- e. a district m u st take in to a c c o u n t th e fact th at a districts te a c h in g staff w ill increase............................................................................................................................ I f . a d istrict m u st tak e in to a c co u n t th e p red ictio n s o f futu re m a n p o w e r n e e d s............................................................................................................................ [ [] [) [I (I [] U [ ] [ ) [I [] [1 [1 [ ] [ ] n i ] M [] [ I [ ] n n f i n [ ] n started in I ) [ ] [ 1 [ ] (J U [] [} [ 1 [ ] [] [] 130 Career Education -■ McLea & Grimes Page 5 (n a Career E ducation feasibility stu d y 1 2 3 4 g. a district m ust recognize that Career E ducation w ill reach m any stu d en ts formerly u n ex p o se d to th e usual vocational o fferin g s..................... [] 11 [] [] h. the district m ust recognize that th e program will require form al en d o r se m en t by th o se determ ining policy. * ............................................................ [] [] [] U i. the district m ust recognize that if the program it to su cceed the fo llo w in g changes m ust be made 1. te x tb o o k s m ust be revised........................................................................ [] [] (1 [] 2. t e x tb o o k s m ust be su p p le m e n te d ......................................................... [1 11 U [] 3. curriculum guides m u st be revised...................................................... [] fl [] [1 4 . teachers retrained.......................................................................................... II [] U [1 5. adm inistrators retrain ed ........................................................................... [] [] fl fl 6. activities rep lan ned....................................................................................... [1 [] [1 13 7. availability for on-th e-job training...................................................... [] [] [1 (I 8 . availability for sim u la tio n ........................................................................ [] [] 11 [1 j. the district m ust recognize that th e fo llo w in g adm inistrative areas w ill be reorganized 1. non -in struction al su p p o rt p erso n n el................................................... (1 11 [1 [1 2. research su p p o rt................................................................................................ [I U [1 11 3. evalu ation su p p o rt.......................................................................................... [] (1 (1 13 4. g u id a n c e .................................................................................................................. U [I [1 tl 5. others - .—— -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- k. the district m ust recognize the com m u nitV 's ability to fu n d the program [] [] (I [] I. the district m ust recognize the social status o f the c o m m u n it y I) (3 13 13 m . the district m u st recognize th a t fo llo w up relations w ith industry are essen tia l....................................................................................................................................... M (1 (I (1 n. a district should be prepared to plan on the evaluation o f the devised program as par the fo llo w in g criteria 1. stu d en ts respect for w o r k ....................................................................... [] [1 [1 (1 2. skills for e m p lo y m e n t .............................................................................. tl (J [) fl 3. stu d en ts aw areness for career o p p o rtu n ities.............................. [1 [] fl [1 4. stronger ties w ith in d u stry..................................................................... [1 fl [3 fl 5. stronger ties w ith labor........................................................................... [] 13 [1 [1 Career Education - McLea & Grimes Page 6 n. c o n tin u e d ^ 2 0. stro n g e r ties w ith Job in f o r m a tio n c a n t e r s [] [ 7. k n o w le d g e o f o c c u p a tio n a l c lu s te rs a n d c a re e r la d d e rs . . . . [ ] I 8. s tu d e n t a c c e p ta n c e o f r e s p o n s ib ility U [ 9. s tu d e n ts re sp e c t fo r a u t h o r i t y U I 10. s tu d e n ts ab ility t o solve p r o b le m s a n d t h in k f o r th e m se lv e s [] [ 3. A c o m m i tt e e w h ich h a t th e re sp o n sib ility f o r a c areer e d u c a ti o n fe a sib ility s tu d y s h o u ld the a-o n -slte a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ................................................................................................................. [] ( b. d istric t su p e rv iso r o f c u r r i c u lu m ......................................................................................... [] [ c. su p e rv iso r o f in d u strial a rts /v o c a tio n a l e d u c a t i o n ................................................. (I [ d . su p e rv iso r o f co u n se lin g a n d g u id a n c e ............................................................................. [] I a. su p e rv iso rs o f a c a d e m ic a re a s............................................................................................... [1 I f. b o a rd o f e d u c a ti o n .......................................................................................................................... U [ g. s u p e r in te n d e n t. ....................................................................................................................... I) I h . te a c h e r s .......................................... M [ i. te a c h e r a s s o c ia tio n s (1 I j. c o u n s e lo r s ............................................................................................................................................... II ( k. s t u d e n t s .......................................................................................................... tl ( I. c o m m u n i t y • • [J I m . i n d u s t r y .................. U t n . r e p re s e n ta tiv e s from R O P /R O C ................................................................................................ [] [ o . c o m m u n i ty co lleg e............... [1 I p . 4 y e a r c o lle g e /u n iv e r s ity .................................................................................... IJ [ q . r e p re s e n ta tiv e s fro m tr a d e u n i o n s ....................................................................................... tl ( 1 . largo b u sin e sse s [J t 2 . sm all b u sin e sse s.................................................................................................. (1 ( 3 . local, s ta te a n d fe d e ra l e m p l o y m e n t p r o g r a m s ............................ [] [ Career Education - McLea St Grimes Pag 4. There are certain barriers to Career Education programs. From the list betow, please indicate which areas should be addressed by a district in considering the feasibility of a Career E ducation program. a. T he barrier of 1. lack o f c o m m it m en t from ed u ca to rs............................................... 2. m isunderstanding of the c o n c e p t........................................................ 3. division b etw een occu pational and academ ic education. . . 4. reluctance of local leadership - initiative from board of ed u cation . ........................................................................................................ 5. lack o f planning skills................................................................................... 6. lack o f positive response to occu pational education. . . . . . 7. oth ers _ ______________________________________________ ______ Please feel free to add anything y o u deem im portant that m ay have been overlooked by Thank you for y o u assistance and c o o p era tio n . APPENDIX D LETTERS TO SUPERINTENDENTS OF PARTICIPATING SCHOOL DISTRICTS CAREER EDUCATION INTERVIEW RELEASE LETTERS TO STUDY RESPONDENTS 133 10 February 1975 We are pleased to inform you that an individual(s) in your Career Education Program has been recommended by Dr. Kenneth Densley, Director of Research for the California State Career Education Task Force, to participate in a survey. Attached is a letter of introduction and endorsement from Mr. Paul N. Peters, Manager of the Task Force. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated in allowing us to conduct our interview with your personnel. We trust that our study will be of assistance to administrators in determining the components in a definition of Career Education and the" resources necessary when considering the feasibility of a Career Education Program. Naturally districts or individuals will not be identified as to response^ and results of our study will be available upon request. Enclosed is a self-addressed stamped envelope and a form granting us permission to interview the following individual(s) as a study respondent. If you have any questions we may be reached at (415) 731-8100 ext. 25 during the day or (415) 731-8392 evenings. Yours truly, Kenneth R. McLea 8 John J. Grimes cc:Study Respondents CAREER EDUCATION INTERVIEW RELEASE Mr. Kenneth R. McLea § John J. Grimes have my permission to interview the following individual(s) regarding Career Education. Superintendent1s Signature District 136 On February 10, 1975 we wrote to your district superintendent and requested permission to interview you regarding our survey in Career Education. We were confident that our research will prove of assistance to those interested in Career Education and look forward to meeting with you. Enclosed is a copy of the problem statement and the survey instrument. Naturally districts or individuals will not be identified as to response, and results of our study will be available upon request. We wish to invite you as our guest for a brief 4 p.m. meeting on Wednesday, February 26, 1975 at the Admiral Nimitz Officer's Club on Treasure Island. Following the meeting we request that you be our guest for refreshments and hors dToeuvres and trust this will afford you an opportunity to visit and renew acquaintances with those in Career Education. Please show this letter to the sentry at the gate for admittance. Sincerely, Kenneth R. McLea § John J. Grimes RSVP - Ifegrets only (415) 731-8392 after 6 p.m. 137 17 February 1975 On February 10,1975 we wrote to your district superintendent and requested permission to interview you regarding our survey in Career Education. We are confident that our research will prove of assistance to those interested in Career Education and look forward to meeting with you. Enclosed is a copy of the Problem Statem ent and the Data Gathering instrument to which we request you respond. We will be available for clarification and questions concerning any of the statements, however, in order to maintain research validity, we request that you respond to each statem ent as it is written. We wish to invite you to attend a meeting of Career Education leaders of the Sacramento area which will be held in the office of Dr. Kenneth Densley, Room 337, Architecture Building, 1500-15th Street at 11 a.m. on 24 February 1975. Recognizing that your tim e is extremely valuable we realize that you may want to respond to our Data Gathering Instrument prior to the meeting. We will make every effort to stress brevity, and are very appreciative to have individuals of your expertise included in our study. Sincerely, Kenneth R. McLea & John J/Grirhes .7 / enclosures: Problem Statem ent Data Gathering Instrument 20 February 1975 On 10 February 1975 we wrote to your district superintendent and requested permission to interview you regarding our survey in Career Education. We are confident that our research will prove of assistance to those interested in Career Education and look forward to meeting you. Enclosed is a copy of the problem statement and the data gathering instrument. Naturally districts or individuals will not be identified as to response, and results of our study will be available upon request. We wish to invite you as our guest for a brief meeting at 4 p.m. on Monday, March 3, 1975 at the Office of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, Los Angeles County Education Center, 9300 East Imperial Highway, Downey, CA. The meeting will be listed on the directory under the title, "Los Angeles County Career Education Ad Hoc Committee" and is scheduled for Room 207. Following the meeting we request that you be our guest for refreshments and trust this will afford you an opportunity to visit and renew acquaintances with those in Career Education. We wish to thank Dr. David Taxis for making the room arrangements and look forward to an excellent meeting. Recognizing that your time is extremely valuable we realize that you may want to respond to our data gathering instrument prior to the meeting. We will make every effort to stress brevity, and are very appreciative to have individuals of your expertise included in our study. Sincerely, Kenneth R. McLea § John J. Grimes enclosures: problem statement data gathering instrument 20 February 1975 On 10 February 1975 we wrote to your district superintendent and requested permission to interview you regarding our survey in Career Educatipn. We are confident that our research will prove of assistance to those interested in Career Education and look forward to meeting with you. Enclosed is a copy of the problem statement and the data gathering instrument. Naturally districts or individuals will not be identified as to response, and results of our study will be available upon request. We wish to invite you to attend a meeting which is being arranged through the kindness of Mr. Dan Nasman, Project Coordinator, Career Education, San Diego County Office of Education. Recognizing that your time is extremely valuable we realize that you may want to respond to our data gathering instrument prior to the meeting. We will make every effort to stress brevity, and are very appreciative to have individuals of your expertise included in our study. Sincerely, Kenneth R. McLea § John J. Grimes Enclosures: problem statement data gathering instrument

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets