University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

School-to-work programs in urban districts in the state of California: a leadership perspective

(USC Thesis Other)

School-to-work programs in urban districts in the state of California: a leadership perspective

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content SCHOOL-TO-WORK PROGRAMS IN URBAN DISTRICTS IN CALIFORNIA: A LEADERSHIP PERSPECTIVE by Rand James Lorah A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION August 2009 Copyright 2009 Rand James Lorah ii Dedication First and foremost this study is dedicated to my wife who has stood by me throughout this project. She always kept me focused and reminded me of what is important in life. Victoria unselfishly kept my spirits high and left the light on awaiting my return from the library. She insisted that I believe in this project and my ability to complete this work. Whenever we had life challenges, she reminded me “not to turn it into a dissertation.” I can only imagine how many times she said it and the personal meaning that phrase has for both of us. Thank God I have a life partner who is always there for me. I would also like to thank my parents Raymond and Laura Lorah. They often talked about and offered invaluable advice about the importance of both school and work. They put words into action by always supporting my academic pursuits. They always stressed how valuable knowledge was and that it was a currency that the entire world acknowledged. When it came to the world of work they taught by example. My father was a carpenter who installed hardwood floors around the world. He worked in the Mayor of Philadelphia’s home, in the Governor’s mansion in Pennsylvania, in palaces throughout the Middle East, and for the Dupont family. At night, and in his spare time he would refurbish gym floors in inner city churches pro bono. When I asked why he did that, he told me he got down on his knees every night and asked God for the power to get down on his knees and work the next day. It is no coincidence that I am an urban educator. iii My mother worked in a bindery for Curtis Publishing lifting 45 pound bales of the Saturday Evening Post even though she only weighed 125lbs. While she was a true pioneer, as a woman working in factories in post World War II America, she was still fasted and committed to the roles of wife and mother. It is with their support that a street kid from Philly could get a world-class education at the University of Southern California. I will forever be indebted to them for their wisdom, love, insight, and support. iv Acknowledgements Without the undying patience and persistence of my chairman of my dissertation committee Dr. Larry Picus, I would have never completed this project. He was always there when needed and he must hold the world record for e-mail response time. When I first had him as professor I thought he was a college kid doing work/study when I first saw him tidying up a classroom. What I came to find was a caring, compassionate, knowledgeable and recognized teacher, professor and nationally recognized researcher who always focused on students’ learning and providing equity for those less fortunate. Communities and students throughout the country, along with myself and other graduate students, will always be grateful for his contributions. Sincere thanks are also in order for the other committee members, Dr. Stu Gothold and Dr. Gilbert Hentschke for providing direction, and helping me getting the questions right and more importantly the answers. They provided sound insight in helping me focus on the real issues that surfaced that were essential in carrying out this research project and in telling the story. During the tenure of this research I received help from a number of others. It is important for me to acknowledge Jan Dunlop, who, as a friend and typist provided sound technical and moral support. Lastly, I will never forget the technical astuteness and support of my research assistant, Ms. Heidi Meza. She spent long hours deciphering my longhand, for which she deserves a medal, and getting most importantly, the bane of all researchers, the formatting and the tables, right. Her knowledge, commitment to students, v her personal focus on life-long learning, and her persistence will serve her well throughout her lifetime. vi Table of Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgements iv List of Tables ix Abstract x Chapter I: Introduction 1 Overview 1 Background of the Problem 1 Statement of the Problem 6 Purpose of the Study 10 Research Questions 10 Importance/Significance of the Study 11 Summary of Methodology 15 Limitations 16 Delimitations 16 Assumptions of the Study 16 Summary 17 Definition of Terms 18 Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 22 Overview 22 School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994: Rationale for Change 22 Organizational Change 22 Rationale for STWOA: Student Outcomes 24 The dropout problem 24 Dropout populations most impacted 27 Students with special needs 29 Additional negative outcomes for individuals with special needs 31 Student outcomes: Why they exist 33 School and work: Isolated systems 37 Disconnect between students’ skills and workplace demands 41 Academic and vocational subject matter 43 Essential Components of School to Work Programs 46 School-based Learning 46 Work-based Learning 49 Connecting Activities 51 Vocational Education in a Historical Context 54 vii Colonial Period 56 19 Century 56 th 20 Century 62 th Distinguishing Between Vocational Education, School-to-Work, and Career and Technical Education 74 The California Experience with STW and CBE 75 A Changing World, a Changing Work Place 78 The Information Age 80 Globalization/Internationalization of Markets 85 International Academic Competition 88 Collective Changes in the Workplace 90 New Skill Formation 91 The Role of School Leaders in the Change Process 95 Administrative-Managerial Emphasis 98 Instructional Leader Emphasis 99 Summary 101 Chapter III: Methodology Overview 105 Research Question 105 Research Design 107 Sample 108 Instrumentation 112 Interviews 114 Surveys 116 Ethical Concerns 117 Data Collection 118 Data Analysis 118 Chapter IV: Research Findings 120 Description of the Sample 120 Instruments Utilized 121 Responses of Site Instructional Leaders 121 Responses of Central Office Administrators 122 Survey Responses from Site Instructional Leaders 122 Profiles of Site Instructional Leaders 122 Educational attainment 122 Work experience 123 Gender 124 Program Description 124 Student Population 124 Discussion of the Findings 126 Research Question 1 127 viii Research Question 2 129 Research Question 3 130 Research Question 4 133 Chapter V: Discussion 136 Overview 136 Purpose of the Study 136 Major Themes 137 Importance of Site Instructional Leaders 138 Importance of Site Leaders’ Experience Outside of Education 140 Teaching Was an Underlying Component of Respondents’ Background in Education 142 Collaboration Is a Requisite Skill for a Site Leader 143 Recommendations for Future Research 145 Summary 145 References 162 Appendices Appendix A: Instructional Leaders’ Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.) 188 Appendix B: Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.) 203 Appendix C: Survey of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.) 215 ix List of Tables Table 1: Study Contacts and Participants 111 Table 2: Study Coded Titles Aligned with District Title 113 Table 3: Profiles of Site Instructional Leaders 123 Table 4: Program Description 125 x Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate School-to-Work programs in an attempt to better understand these programs and how they were implemented. Instructional leaders and central office administrators in School-to-Work programs in urban settings in the state of California participated in this study. A multi-method approach utilizing both quantitative and qualitative descriptive analytic case study research methods were used in an attempt to better understand the implementation process of School-to-Work programs and barriers to implementation. Instructional leaders and central office administrators who play an integral role in School- to-Work programs in urban areas in California were interviewed using open-ended interview protocols developed for this study, the Instructional Leader’s Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P) and the Central Office Staff Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.). Site instructional leaders were also administered a survey developed specifically for this study soliciting data including professional background information and individual program descriptions. Qualitative and quantitative data was collected and organized into three major areas with a focus on the research questions posed in this investigation. This qualitative data was analyzed primarily with an individual item analysis from the interview responses of site instructional leaders and central office staff reflective of the cogent topics addressed in the review of literature and secondly, framed within the context of major themes that emerged as a result of this research. In addition survey data was analyzed quantitatively, which provided descriptive background information of site xi instructional leaders’ backgrounds . Additional individual descriptions of programs were also provided. The following are the major themes that emerged as this data was analyzed 1. Site Instructional Leaders were considered an important and essential component in the implementation and operation of STW programs 2. It was considered an important attribute that site leaders had extensive experience outside of education. 3. Teaching was a major underlying component of site leaders’ background in education. 4. Collaboration is a requisite skill for a site leader. The survey of instructional leaders examined gender, experience within and outside of the educational environment. Other information solicited included educational background, program description, students served, and plant configuration. All of three respondents showed at minimum had at least a Bachelor’s level education. The respondents all showed extensive experience with long tenures in different positions. Examining educational attainment level indicates that all participated in undergraduate preparation that revolved around trade specialization. The service delivery system of choice was the Career Academy Model. Program descriptions showed that these small learning communities focused on specific career themes. There are numerous positive outcomes for students who take part in these programs. Increases in academic interest, performance, and engagement are outlined. Additionally there is an indication that participation in these programs decreases the drop xii out rate and increases attendance. Participants also experience more positive post secondary outcomes as increased earnings and involvement in postsecondary schools has also been demonstrated. 1 Chapter I Introduction Overview The purpose of this proposed study was to investigate School-to-Work programs that subscribe to tenets expressed in the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994), in an attempt to better understand the implementation process. Those in leadership positions at School-to-Work programs, instructional leaders and central office administrators, at a number of randomly selected programs in urban centers throughout the state of California participated in this study. The study is presented in five chapters. Chapter I is an introduction to the study. Chapter II is a review of the literature, which addresses a number of the cogent topics that are essential in carrying out this research study. Chapter III provides the methodology to be utilized in this study. Chapter IV presents the results of this study and Chapter V contains the summary, conclusions, implications, and suggestions for additional research. Background of the Problem An examination of school reform, in an historical context, can provide insight in investigating change initiatives, and specifically the implementation of the School-to- Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994). Essential to the discussion of change in schools is the view that reform is often initiated by the perceived conditions within school, student outcomes, and the changing purposes of schooling. A number of educational philosophers and theorists coupled with modern day critics of the American High School, another collective voice within the educational 2 community, have also spoken and written extensively of the need to change schools based primarily on the discussion and decisions that are linked to individuals’ and groups’ perceptions of the purposes of schooling, often coupled with student outcomes (Adler, 1984; Boyer, 1983; Dewey, 1944; Goodlad, 1976, 1984; Olson, 1997a; Sizer 1984, 1992; Tucker, 1991, 1996). As the purpose of schooling has changed, the changes mandated for school have also evolved. The purpose of schooling has changed drastically since Americans first became entrenched in this enterprise. Beginning with the passage of the Old Deluder Satan Act of 1647, which marked the genesis of public education, (Pulliam, 1987) schools were seen as depositories and vehicles for dissemination of religious thought. Vernon Howard (1998) views the purposes of school, behind the what, how, and the reasons why we learn, at the heart of the change process. Thomas Jefferson advocated that the charge of the educational system was to create an informed citizenry, able to farm, and able to debate the topics of the day (Elmore, Peterson, & McCarthy, 1990; Resnick & Wirt, 1996). Mann and Dewey expressed the view in the 19th and 20th centuries, respectively, that schools should cultivate the ability of its graduates to question, to reason, and to perform skills of democratic social interaction (Dewey, 1944). Eisner, (1994) recounts how the writings of Thorndike and Taylor purported schools and students as factories producing products, an apt analogy for a country steeped in the nuances of the industrial age. This was also a cogent issue often addressed when, how, where, for who, and for what reasons vocational education should be implemented, an essential concept in 3 understanding this legislation and its subsequent implementation. Through the next three centuries many have supplicated changing the ways in which we school children in America based on the notion that the underlying purpose of schooling has been changing and evolving over time. Change in any organization must have, in its foundation, first established a need for change based on the pertinent questions asked. Some of these questions include: what is the fundamental purpose of school? Why is change needed, and how is the change process carried out? The need for change in schools is well documented (Bailey, 1997; Deal, 1990; Deal & Peterson, 1999; Eisner, 1994; Fullan, 1991; Goodlad, 1984; Goodlad, Mantle- Bromely & Goodlad, 2004; Harvey & Housman, 2004; Murphy, 1990,1997; National Center for the Education and the Economy, 2007; Oakes, Quartz, Ryan, & Lipton 2000; Patterson, 2003; Sarason, 1997; Schlechty, 2001; Uhler, 1979). This need is often rooted internally in conditions in schools and the outcomes students experience including poor academic achievement, the achievement gap, abhorrent dropout rates, and the difficult disjointed transitions to adult life whether that be postsecondary training or the world of work. The need is externally coupled when these outcomes are superimposed on the changing social, economic, and political realities that exist within and outside of our borders. Appeals to change the way in which we educate young people in America are derived from a number of sources including the media, government, and the business community (Murphy, 1990a; Schlechty, 1997, 2001). A number of reports, symposiums, 4 and committees in the political and business sector including the National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983), the Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy (1986), the National Governor's Association (1987), and the Joint Council on Economic Education (1989), and National Association for Education and the Economy (2007) unabashedly point out academic performance deficits, the achievement gap, school completion rates, and the transition to adult life for many who go on to postsecondary schools and ultimately work settings. These reports cite these outcomes as a mandate for change. These outcomes, graduation rates (Barton, 2005; Harvey & Houseman, 2004; Jerald, 2006), academic achievement levels (Jerald, 2006; Murphy, 1990), the achievement gap (Association for Curriculum and Development, 1986; NAEP, 2000; Perie, Moran, & Lutkus, 2005), and an incongruent transition into the college setting (Lee, 2000), and ultimately the meaningful world of work (Barton, 1997, 2005) strengthens the argument that change is necessary. External pressures of economic, social, and political origins have been the catalysts for changes in our schools, (Eisner, 1994; Murphy, 1990; Ryan & Imel, 1996; Spring, 1993) the preparatory institutions in America. Failure to respond to these requests for changes in schooling has met with unrelenting cynicism and criticism of these institutions. Criticism of schools and respondent calls for change is a constant companion of schools, not a new phenomenon. Valentine and Phelps in Schlechty (1997, p.3), provides accounts from the late 1800s where schools were chided for their inadequacies citing 5 “American schools are little less than undisciplined mobs and that elementary education has become in many places a vaudeville show.” A history of change in schools demonstrates that these catalysts, from economic, political, and social forces often have been revealed in a number of disparate ways. This manifestation of these outside influences, not directly linked to the outcomes students have experienced and conditions within our schools have played a role, using judiciary providence regarding the way we school children in America. Participation in compulsory attendance at public schools was born out of attempts to Americanize the schools. Requiring teacher loyalty, banning the teachings of Darwin, and limiting the teachings of foreign languages was a pejorative, negative connotation on pluralism in education and society at large (Yudoff, Kirp, & Levin, 1992). The perceived view that, by propelling Sputnik into orbit, the Communist threat had punctured the intellectual armor of America pushed our schools to place an emphasis on the teaching and learning of mathematics and science (Eisner, 1994; Ryan & Imel 1996). Similar worldwide circumstances, throughout history, in the industrial age, the information age, and now in the 21rst century, with the new millennium, shows some of the same dilemmas that historically have been and will be facing our nation. These include international economic and academic competition, changes in the world and workplace, and the failure of schools to prepare our students for the ever-changing demands in these new technologically and information rich work environments. These realities, along with the poor lifelong outcomes that many our students experience, shows demonstrable proof that change is necessary. 6 Statement of the Problem While the reform movement of the eighties was centered on academic achievement performance deficits, the prelude to the passage and enactment of STWOA was the examination and condemnation of the disjointed transitions from school to postsecondary schools for some and the ultimate destination, for all, the world of work for our nation’s youth (Neumark, 2007). A Gallup Poll that was carried in 1996 found that when Americans were asked to enumerate the purposes of schooling they responded overwhelmingly “to get better jobs, to make more money, and to achieve financial success” (Elam, Rose & Gallup, 1996 p.55) These responses mirrored much of, and encapsulated the rationale involved in the passage of the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994). This dialogue has been heightened in the last three decades as a result of a changing world juxtaposed to an archaic institution, the American High School (Jackson, 2004; Friedman, 2006; Hargreaves & Goodson 2006; Lee, 2000), a critical happenstance where the world has changed and our schools have not. The American high schools isolate students from the adult world (Stern, Dayton, & Raby, 1992). Lee, (2000, p.69), in addressing the need and impetus for changing the traditional high school framework that has existed for decades states, “The American High School system remains fragmented and mostly unresponsive to the real needs of students, who are not book smart and not headed to college” often referred to as the forgotten half (Barton, 1978; Lee, 2000; Neumark, 2007). These same students have received substantial attention in a government report issued on December 14, 2006, Tough 7 Choices Or Tough Times authored by the National Center for Education and the Economy (NCEE, 2007), where they are labeled as the college have nots. Conversely, the largest majority of students, those proceeding to college, which could be aptly labeled the unforgotten half and the college haves, have also faced significant challenges. Hunt & Tierney’s graphic depiction of America’s leaky education pipeline provides evidence of this. Out of 100 ninth graders, 68 of this cohort will graduate on time. 40 of these enroll directly in college, 27 are still enrolled the following year, and only 18 earn an associate degree within three years or a B.A. within six years, implying that 82 don’t make it (NCEE, 2007). Many who go on to college face remediation in both math and language arts. A resounding cry by college professors that an alarming number of students do not arrive on campus with the needed writing skills is currently echoed by industry leaders who see it as a needed skill for designing and achieving personal success, but add that, this is a skill that few college graduates have mastered (Budig, 2006). Lee states (p.8, 2000) “college professors tell me that three-quarters of their freshmen have no business in sitting in a college classroom.” Rosenbaum (2002) argues that 40% of incoming freshman are taking classes in college lecture halls, but in reality, are still participating in a high school curriculum. Kliebard (1999) reports that when college juniors and seniors were surveyed only 7% could name the state’s two senators and only 50% knew when World War II began and when it ended. Data from 2003-2004 shows that 35.9% of all freshmen and sophomores 8 had taken at least one remedial class (National Center on Education and the Economy, 2007). The website for the Broad Foundation, in soliciting participants from industry across many different backgrounds for the Broad Center For Management of School Systems, has streamed on its website a dire summation underscoring the need for a more effective preparatory regimen and transition for all students. “Too many children are not well prepared for college, work, and productive citizenship. The American dream is at stake” (2006 p.1). The negative penchants directed at educational institutions are not only just reserved for those in business, government, or the media outside of the school setting, but also include those working within the schools. The recruitment of good, qualified, and savvy teachers has been a difficult proposition over time (Heller, 2004). Teacher retention as enumerated by many in the academic literature (Clement, 2000; Fullan, 1991; Heller, 2004; Wong & Wong, 1998) provides evidence of this internal institutional dissatisfaction. Parents have also expressed varying degrees of chagrin with public schooling. The growth of home schooling may be attributed to a culmination of a number of factors including dissatisfaction with current public schooling and the increased receptivity of the general public (Dahm, 1996; Lines, 1996, 2000). Many families do not place trust in schools. Voucher initiatives, often based on political popularity (Pascoppella, 2006), give further evidence to parental discord (Finn & Gau, 1998). This is noted particularly in 9 minority communities (Molnar, Farrell, Johnson & Sapp 1996), where the achievement gap and poor student academic achievement is most evident. Students have also expressed dissatisfaction. Junior high school and middle school students, perhaps as high as 50%, view their educational experience as boring (Scales, 1996). High school students frame their perception of their secondary experience using similar adjectives and with a higher rate than junior and middle school students sharing this view (National Center for Education and the Economy, 2007). One recent survey indicated a decline from 40% in 1983 to 28% in 2000 when seniors were questioned about the meaningfulness of their schoolwork. An additional item, soliciting information regarding the utility of school learning later in life, dropped from 51% to 39% during the same timeframe (Houston, 2006). A myriad of stakeholders in the educational process voice similar feelings of discontent and ridicule toward the institutions they support, work in, or attend. The problem as delineated by government, business, and the media, in addition to the institution’s constituency: parents, students, and teachers, is as stark as it is riveting—schools must change. Questions about the necessity of change are rarely asked; in its place are queries of how to bring about change (Brandt, 1990). The Noah Principle provides an insightful metaphor surrounding change in our secondary schools: “No more prizes for predicting rain. Prizes only for building arks” (Harvey & Housman, 2004, p.5). Proponents of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act (STWOA, 1994) viewed this legislation and implementation as a remedy that addressed student and teacher engagement, reduction in dropouts, increasing academic achievement, narrowing the 10 achievement gap, and ameliorating the difficult and challenging path between students exiting the schoolhouse door and proceeding to life after high school, whether that be work or post-secondary schooling. The students most impacted are students of color, those who speak a first language other than English, those not college bound, and those qualifying for a number of federal handicapping conditions. An examination of school census data would show a large number of these students attending our urban schools. The STWOA (1994) spoke extensively of these same groups and the reality that many do not complete high school. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to investigate School-to-Work programs in an attempt to better understand these programs and how they were implemented. Instructional leaders and central office administrators in School-to-Work programs in urban settings in the state of California participated in this study. Research Questions 1. What role do instructional leaders and central office administrators play in the implementation of School-to-Work programs with the current emphasis on standards driven curriculum and focus on college preparation coursework? 2. What barriers had to be overcome in the implementation process? 3. What skills, knowledge base, and practices of school leadership contribute to the implementation or non-implementation of School-to-Work programs? 4. What specific data is there that indicates and supports better outcomes for students enrolled in School to Work programs? 11 The questions selected provide the rationale for the topics included in the review of literature, and are the foundation for the methodology utilized, the data collection undertaken, analysis, and ultimately, the discussion of the data in this investigation’s concluding chapters. Importance/Significance of the Study Many urban school districts face significant challenges including increased dropout rates, poverty, teaching an ever increasing diverse student population, widening achievement gaps, and operating with dwindling financial resources. The number of students urban schools serve is a testament to the impact urban schools can have on their students and ultimately their communities. These urban districts are continually investigating program options that decrease dropout rates, narrow the achievement gap, and increase academic achievement and engagement of students and staff (Anyon, 1997). Investigating School-to-Work programs with a focus on leadership is essential in examining the implementation process in the state of California. The academic literature is rich and abundant with individuals citing that reform efforts fail or succeed on the shoulders of school administrators, and that they are the key ingredient (California State University, 2001; Eisner, 1994; Fullan, 1991, 2003; Hall, & Hord, 1987; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Quinn, 1996; Wong & Rutledge, 2006). Effective principals are focused on “active leadership, motivating staff, motivating students, reaching the community and continually improving the school” (Fullan, 1991, p. 159). Leaders in successful high schools embrace and celebrate change, viewing it as 12 exciting, not threatening (Daggett & McNulty, 2005). The results can provide insight to urban areas around the U.S. that can benefit from the data collected and analyzed. A number of urban school districts in the state of California, which is the sample used in this study, with its school population that has large numbers of students from a wide variety of linguistically and racially-diverse backgrounds, (Barker, 2001; Weiler, 1998), and that also experience poor student outcomes, further supports the importance and the significance of this study. Considerable achievement gaps exist between Hispanic and Anglo students. A similar longstanding trend is noted when comparing African American and Anglo students (McClure, 2005; Mullis, Dosey, Owen & Phillips, 1990; Trueba, 1988; Van Laar, 2001; Weiler, 1998). Uline and Johnson (2005) confirm that substantial achievement gaps still exist and that academic achievement can be predicted by income, race, language background, and other demographic data. This is not unique to the societal, economic, and cultural factors contributing to the academic have and have-nots in America alone. Virtually all countries around the world have an established, defined achievement gap based on S.E.S. data accumulated (Rotberg, 2001). Along with this achievement gap that is based on standardized testing data is the achievement gap that is glowingly apparent when high school completion rates are examined and compared, along ethnic, racial, and linguistically diverse population guidelines. Our urban school districts in the state of California, in many ways reflect the diverse student population of many urban districts throughout the United States. The diverse student population in the San Diego Unified School District, a district not 13 included in the study but it is one that clearly demonstrates objectively this diverse student census data. It provides sufficient and succinct evidence that shows that the Hispanic and African-American students comprise 56.1% of the total student population (SDUSD, 2003). Demographic projections cited at the state level forecast a preponderance of diverse student populations in our urban schools indicative of the sample utilized in this study. It was predicted by the school year 2007-2008 Hispanic students would comprise half of the public school population. Caucasian students would decline from 38% to 30.2% of the public school population. The Asian population would remain stable at approximately 8%, while African-American students would decline minimally from 8.6% in school years 1998-1999 to 2007-2008. By school year 2007-2008, more than two- thirds of K-12 students in this state would be diverse learners and people of color (State of California, Department of Finance, 2003). The County of San Diego, also demonstrating along with a number of other county and urban school districts in California, is also aligned with similar demographic changes and accompanying data. This data is indicates that school populations in school year 2000-2001 has, 8.7% of K-12 county schools’ population of African Americans and 37.8% of Hispanics’ respectively. Extrapolation to the school year 2010-2011 indicates an increase of African-American students to 9% and Hispanic students to 47.5% (Langdon, 2001). English learners have increased at a rate of 99% in the last decade within San Diego County schools (California Department of Education, 2000). This demographic data along with the outcomes experienced by these diverse learners exacerbates the need for change. 14 Many studies have concluded that School-to-Work programs decrease drop out rates and discipline issues significantly, increase attendance and graduation rates, and contribute to more positive postsecondary school outcomes (Bailey, Hughes, & Karp, 2002; Neumark, 2004; 2007). A precept inherent in the STWOA (1994) and a theme weaved throughout School- to-Work programs is the mandate that those systems exist for the benefit of all students. Although many students will travel a variety of paths, they are all ultimately destined for the universal world of work. Students, most impacted in the process, are those in urban settings, those from diverse backgrounds, and those with special needs. Despite the notion that these sub-groups may reflect that some individuals have attributes that place them in more than one sub-group, there are a number of urban districts in the state of California, that have overwhelming numbers of these students that make up a large majority of their student population. Congruence between the demographic makeup of those urban school districts and other districts with similar attributes, and those encountering difficulty in the transition process, those with disabilities, those not bound for college and those who face transition challenges in the college arena, both within the State of California, and throughout the United States, enhances the importance of this study. The current call to reform our high schools in the last five years focuses on many of the same issues as the School-To-Work movement. The STWOA and the recent attempts to change our secondary schools are embedded with the same cogent issues and concerns. Some of these concerns and issues are the need for change, the 15 acknowledgement of the social, economic, and political realities of a changing world and workplace, international academic and economic competition, a dedicated focus on work readiness, preparation for postsecondary options, and a sundry list of creating more positive outcomes from those exiting our nation’s high schools (American Center for Career and Technical Education, 2006; Barton, 2006; California Department of Education, 2002; Colvin, 2006; Curran, 2005; Driscoll, 2005; Harvey & Houseman, 2004; Lewis, 2004, 2005; National Center for Education and the Economy, 2007; National Governor’s Association, 2006; National High School Alliance, 2005; Olson, 2006). Even in the most recent presidential election year, 2008, education leaders are pushing the presidential candidates to focus on career and technical education as it empowers our nation’s children to impact national economic development (Uy, 2008). This argument has been persistently and consistently used to support vocational education throughout history, based on furthering our national interests (Kliebard, 1999; 2004). Summary of Methodology A multi-method approach utilizing both quantitative and qualitative descriptive analytic case study research methods were used in an attempt to better understand the implementation process of School-to-Work programs. Instructional leaders and central office administrators who play an integral role in School-to-Work programs in urban areas in California were interviewed and also administered surveys, soliciting data from a number of different sources. These instruments modified from instruments developed by the School to Career office of San Diego Unified School District were created expressly 16 for this study based on the study’s conceptual framework in order to examine the implementation process and look at the role leadership plays in the process. Limitations The subjects who participated in this study were chosen on the basis that they are a deviant or extreme (outlier) sample. Utilizing purposeful sampling techniques, instructional leaders and central office administrators from only School-to-Work programs in urban areas in the state of California were invited to participate. This sample was specifically based on program sustainability in accordance with geographical location. The small size of the sample (3-5 programs) also contributes to the limitations of this study. Delimitations This study gathered quantitative and qualitative data from a number of School-to- Work programs in urban areas in California. All subjects who participated in this study were instructional leaders and central office administrators involved in these programs. Therefore the data obtained is specific to those involved in programs in urban areas in the state of California, allowing for little generalization to dissimilar schools or dissimilar geographic locations. Assumptions of the Study Some of the assumptions of this study were: 1. The sample selected is representative of the criteria utilized in the selection process. (Participants are involved in School-to-Work programs in urban areas in California). 17 2. The participants in the study answered the questions posed in the interview process and in the survey honestly and to the best of their ability. Summary The calls for changing schools come from those in government, the media, the teaching profession, parents, and those most impacted, the students. The history of change in America, with its link to the purpose of schooling, is often premised on conditions external to the school setting. Many of those external conditions have their foundation in the political, social, or economic context. The world and the workplace has changed drastically, with an explosion of information, a barrage of emerging technologies, and changes in the skill base required for the workplace. The need for change is also framed in internal factors including conditions existent in schools and student outcomes. The scope of these internal conditions includes student non-engagement, deficits in academic achievement, inexorable dropout rates, existing achievement gaps between different linguistic, ethic, and racial groups. These issues are compounded when examining disjointed connections between the preparation in high school to postsecondary training and also to the world of work. The School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA) addressed the need for change and a possible vehicle for amelioration of the schools’ shortcomings. This chapter provided an introduction to the changing purposes of schooling, the need for change, based on internal conditions of school and the outcomes that many diverse students exiting urban high schools face. This study examines School-to-Work 18 programs in urban districts in the state of California with a focus on leadership involved in the implementation process. Definition of Terms In an effort to better equip the reader with terminology utilized in this investigation and to aid in the interpretation and understanding of the study the following definitions are provided. School to work (STW): A combined system based approach, that provides linkages between students, schools, and the workplace in an effort to reform schools and better prepare students for the world of work. This is a comprehensive term that is used to describe many of the patchwork activities that have resulted from the passage of the STWOA (1994) (Halperin, 1994; Hartoonian & Van Scotter, 1996; Ryan & Imel, 1996; STWOA, 1994). School to career: An interchangeable term which describes School to Work activities, systems approaches as delineated in the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994. Career academies: These are school within school programs or at times found in set aside locations that focus on a combination of a specific curriculum and assorted activities surrounding a particular industry cluster. Examples include the graphics or medical services industry (Ryan & Imel, 1996). School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994): Federal legislation which provides venture capital to states and local communities in an attempt to build systems between students, schools, communities, and work places, preparing all students 19 both for work and other postsecondary options. The Act is funded jointly by the Department of Labor and the Department of Education (Boesel & McFarland, 1994; STWOA (1994). All students: A concept central to STW system building that is specifically designed in the act. Both male and female students from a broad range of backgrounds and circumstances including disadvantaged students, students with diverse racial, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians, students with disabilities, students with limited English proficiency, migrant children, school dropouts, and academically talented students (STWOA 1994, p. 7). Dropout: Students who leave school early (early school leavers) who do not complete requirements for a high school diploma. This may be an event (leaving school early) or described as a specific status: not in school and correspondingly not a graduate. Tech prep: The name given to programs that offer at least four years of course work in a sequence that encourages and prepares students in a technical career. These programs typically begin in the 11th grade and culminate with a certificate or an associate degree after two years of postsecondary training (Hull & Parnell, 1991; Parnell, 1992). Contextual learning: Knowledge that is gained from contextual learning is born of experience with real world applications. Students learn experientially (Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). School-based learning: Integrated learning that takes place at the school site that combines vocational and academic curriculums including career awareness, career 20 exploration, and counseling opportunities that begin no later than the seventh grade (Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). Work-based learning: A work component within the School to Work system that gives students an opportunity to be involved in work experiences, on site job training, and workplace mentoring. The focus is clearly on where the learning takes place (Hamilton & Hamilton 1997a; Hamilton & Hamilton 1997b; Stasz, Kaganoff, & Eden, 1994; Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). Integrated curriculum: The emergence of academic and occupational or career subject matter where there is an emphasis on the interdisciplinary nature of learning. In its purest form, there is a blend of the various academic disciplines, math, science, language arts, and social studies coupled with vocational subject matter around major career themes (Stasz, Kaganoff, & Eden, 1994; Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). Local Partnership: A local entity responsible for School to Work opportunities and programs. This partnership includes local educational agencies (LEA), employers, and post-secondary institutions (STWOA, 1994). Vocational Education: This is a curricular option that has an extensive history that addresses providing an educational program that may be trade specific or broader in its approach to provide job readiness skills for all students across all different industries ( Hayward & Benson, 1993). Career and Technical Education: This is a more contemporary curriculum approach that describes current practices involving specific occupation clusters in high school that allow for work readiness and success in technical schools, junior college and 21 four year college degree programs through the use of an integrated system approach blending academic and vocational subject matter (Phelps, 2006). The remainder of this investigation includes a review of literature in Chapter II and the methodology utilized in this study in Chapter III. Chapter IV outlines the findings of this investigation, with the summary, conclusions, implications, and recommendations for additional research elucidated in Chapter V. 22 Chapter II Review of the Literature Overview The purpose of this chapter was to provide a comprehensive review of the literature to offer a foundation for the legislative impetus, passage, and implementation of School-to-Work programs and how this progression to enactment and implementation is related to the following salient topics, (a) School to Work Act of 1994: rationale for change; (b) School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994: essential components; (c) vocational education in a historical context; (d) a changing world, a changing workplace; (e) the role of school leaders in the change process. School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994: Rationale for Change A study that investigates a change initiative based on legislative enactment and the barriers faced in implementation must look at change from a perspective that examines the reasons why individuals and groups are calling for a change with a broader more general look at the change process. It is equally important to look at change in the more specific context and examination regarding the STWOA change initiative. Organizational Change Changing structures, practices, methods, and ultimately culture in an organization is a complex task (Awbrey, 2005; Blankstein, 2004; Deal & Kennedy, 1982; Deal, 1990; Deal & Peterson, 1999; Fullan, 1991; Hall & Hord, 1987; Hargreaves, 1997, Hargreaves & Goodson 2006; Schlechty, 2001; Senge, 1999). 23 The unique dichotomy posed by proponents of change, that it is something obviously needed but simultaneously avoided creates inherent obstacles (Evans, 1996; Drucker, 1994, 1995). Wheatley (1994), a proponent of chaos theory, states that change has the unique attribute of drowning individuals and organizations in its attempt to save them. Deciding what to change, how to change it, and finally implementing a new course of action complicates the process (Eisner, 1994; Fullan, 1991). Schools are not immune. Awbrey, (2005, p.1) recounts a disheartening phrase uttered by many educators, including faculty and administrators, citing their experience with continual change in the schools at the secondary and postsecondary levels, “I died on the hill of general education reform.” The substantive notion that all organizations are resistant to change is essential to understanding barriers to change, a topic addressed in this study’s research questions. “There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success than, to take the lead in the in the introduction of a new order of things” (Machiavelli, 1958, p. 29). Changing structural components, lengthening the school day, increasing academic offerings, focusing on performance and accountability in an isolated fashion has not realistically changed schools. Real reform calls for a transformation of our schools (Deal, 1990; Deal & Peterson, 1999; Sarason, 1997). If school change is to be effective it must encompass change that is systemic (Fullan, 1991, 1993; Miller & Kantrov, 1998; National High School Alliance, 2005). 24 Similar to other change initiatives, those that supported the passage of this legislation and the subsequent implementation of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994), have had to first establish a focus on the reasons or the need for schools to change. Rationale for STWOA: Student Outcomes Legislation unveiled in the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA 1994), addresses a number of concerns outlined by government, media, labor, business, parents, and students. Student outcomes, including graduation rates (Barton, 2005; Harvey & Houseman, 2004; Jerald, 2006), academic achievement performance (Jerald, 2006; Murphy, 1990), the achievement gap (Association for Curriculum and Development, 1986; NAEP, 2000), student non-engagement, and difficult transition into the college classroom, (Lee, 2000), and, for all, sooner or later, the world of work (Barton, 1997, 2005) presented a strong argument that change is necessary. Lastly, the most important constituent in the change process, the student, the client, the schools are there to serve, is often ignored (Wagner & Sconyers, 1996). Students’ input is rarely a solicited commodity in the school reform movement or process (Black, 2004). Schools with irrelevant curriculums are viewed by students as not meeting their needs (Johnson, 1997). Mirroring their parental counterparts, more students in public than in private schools expressed dissatisfaction with their school experience on the secondary level (Johnson, 1997). The dropout problem. Our inner cities, which have the largest number of low- income students, may be impacted most by this growing issue of dropping out (Lehr, 25 Johnson, Bremer, Cosio, & Thompson, 2004). Early school leaving is an even more frequently engaged in behavior for students with disabilities (Kemp, 2006; Reschly & Christenson, 2006), where the dropout rate for this group is estimated at 30% with some specific disability sub-groups are estimated to be in excess of 50% (Dunn, Chambers, & Rabren, 2005). Although there are rampant disparities in the accounting methods utilized in estimating dropout data, a recent report by the National Governors Association Task Force on State High School Graduation Data, places the current dropout rate at 30% (Curran, 2005). Barton concurs with that 30% estimate and also adds that it is continually rising (2005). Whether it is determined that the acquisition of a high school diploma is a finish line or a starting line, it can be argued that many are finished before they start. The perceived disconnect between school and work on the part of young people can in many ways explain the pervasive lack of student engagement. Prolonged lapses of student engagement can result in students opting out of institutions that are absent of personal meaning and connection to life outside them (Neumark, 2007). Varying degrees of success in transitioning from secondary school to post- secondary training or the world of work are dependent on one's preparation (The ERIC Review, 1996). College bound and non-college bound students have obstacles to overcome as they negotiate this course. High school diploma in hand, large numbers enter either two or four-year postsecondary institutions and remediation course rates address the challenges individuals face in college. Others opt to work in a plethora of work environments ranging from service industries to retail establishments. It is argued that one 26 segment of our population, those who have left school early without earning a diploma, provide evidence of the dearth of adequate transition programs (STWOA, 1994), and subsequently have a barrage of barriers to overcome in their search for meaningful employment. Although one of the six goals of national education policy in the United States developed in the 90’s was to achieve a 90% graduation rate by the year 2000 the literature indicates striking contrasts of existing data with this stated goal (Barton, 2005; Curran, 2005; Dorn,1996; Harvey & Housman, 2004; National Center for the Education and the Economy, 2007; Yesseldyke, Algozzine, & Thurlow, 2000). Only 19 states out of 50 have reached a 90% graduation rate (Lehr, Jonson, Bremer, Cosio, & Thompson 2004). “More than five thousand students drop out of American high schools every school day in middle class suburbs, rural towns, major urban centers, and everywhere in between” (Toch, 2003, p.XII). The Children’s Defense Fund (2005) indicates that 1 in 8 children in the U.S. will not graduate. Based on calculations involving the typical school day, (7 hours), and the typical school year (180 days), outlined in real terms, shows that approximately every nine seconds, an additional student drops out of school in America. The expectation of graduation is franchised to all segments of the population. In the last 100 years most individuals held the expectation that all children should graduate high school, contrary to beliefs held in previous centuries (Dorn, 1996). Despite these perceptions many do not graduate, instead they join the ranks of early school leavers. Definitive, empirically sound 27 measures to quantify dropout statistics are muddled in conflicting accounting procedures and manipulated data (Roderick, 1993). Examining the data, on balance, one could argue that approximately 25% of students fail to complete high school (Altenbaugh, Engel, & Martin, 1995; Fine, 1991; Roderick, 1993). Magiziner & Clinton (1992) placed the rate somewhere between 30% and 50% with a caveat that urban areas have a much higher prevalence rate. Disaggregating this data the urban school scenario paints a more disturbing picture where dropout rates are projected to vary from forty to as high as eighty percent (Althenbaugh, Engel, & Martin, 1995; Clinton and Magaziner, 1992; Fine, 1991; Roderick, 1993). Kozol (2000) tells a much sadder tale. One high school in the Bronx, Morris High School, enrolls 2000 students, in grades 9 through 12 . Only 90 reach 12 grade, and th th th approximately 65 graduate. Dropout populations most impacted. There are many dropout investigations to date. The High School and Beyond Study, found social class to be the most accurate predictor of who drops out (Fine, 1991). The same inquiry found Native Americans' dropout rate 22.7%, Hispanics' 18.7%, African-Americans' 16.8%, Whites' 12.2% and Asians' 4.8% respectively. The large number of ethnic groups and those from impoverished backgrounds, in major cities, provide adequate grounding for the high percentage of dropouts and early school leavers recorded in our urban centers. Our urban centers are a key focus of the STW legislation (STWOA, 1994) with a focus on increased graduation requirements coupled with an educational system that provides greater access 28 to students from vastly different economic, social, and linguistic backgrounds (Dorn, 1996; Waggoner, 1991). Raising standards, by definition, means making it more difficult to earn a diploma (Hamilton, 1987). Some have advocated that a number of students should be labeled push outs, an indictment of an educational system that was unable to meet their needs, as the standards move the bar vertically. The system was unable to offer compensatory strategies that could have contributed to better outcomes including acquisition of a high school diploma. While the dropout issue remains among the most important issues facing secondary educators, many of these same educators point to data that shows more individuals graduating in the 1990s compared to previous decades (Dorn, 1996; Fine, 1991; Roderick, 1993). The individuals that appeared most affected are those in urban areas and those steeped in economic, racial, and linguistically different realities, succinctly those considered poor and people of color. Spanning this chasm of urban and racial dividing under education is another disenfranchised group in our schools: those afflicted with the label—disabled. This population was specifically addressed in subsequent legislation concerns aired regarding their under service .It is argued that this one segment of our population, those who qualify for one or more of the Federal Handicapping Conditions, who have left school early without earning a diploma, provide evidence of the dearth of adequate transition programs (STWOA, 1994). Subsequently this population has a barrage of barriers to overcome in their search for meaningful employment and positive lifelong outcomes. 29 Students with special needs. Individuals with disabilities experience higher rates of early school leaving when compared to their non-disabled peers (Dorn, 1996; Dunn, Chambers, & Rabren, 2004; Kemp, 2006; MacMillian, 1991; Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005; Christenson, 1995; Reschly & Christenson, 2006; Wagner, Blackorby & Hebbeley, 1993). The United States Department of Education pronounces the dropout rate of individuals with special needs at 30% (2002). The stand alone figure of these students who have an abundant number of needs who exit our schools approximates 560,000 a year (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). A federal study reports that an average of 312 students with special needs drop out of high school each and every day (U.S. Department of Education, 1988). The dropout rates of those with disabilities is twice that of their non-disabled peers (Dunn, Chambers, & Rabren, 2004). Accounting discrepancies and the lack of formal, standardized procedures for counting dropouts among the special education population is also evident (Roderick, 1993). Despite problems with recording of accurate data, estimates for dropout rates for students meeting any one of the thirteen federal handicapping conditions places the rate somewhere between 25% and 50% (MacMillian, 1991). The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) (1988, 1989, 1990) in their reports to Congress on the implementation of the Education of the Handicapped Act, puts the rate at 27.40%. It is important to recognize that only students who formally withdraw from school without completing their educational program are counted as dropouts in their study (OSEP, 1988, 1989, 1990). Those who do not formally withdraw are not included in the dropout database. Westat data (1991) presents the argument that even though OSEP’s report is extensive in 30 recording the existing behavior of students with special needs by both age and disability category, there is still a wide variation among different states in recording data, with some states reporting no students dropping out or exiting via the “other or unknown category.z’ The formula is far more complex than subtracting the number of those granted diplomas from the total special-needs population and arriving at a number and designating it as the number of early school leavers. Individuals with special needs and those bearing specific handicap conditions make extensive use of the Certificate of Completion, essentially a certification of attendance—not a high school diploma as an exiting document (MacMillian, 1991). When comparing students across disability categories, students with emotional disturbance and those meeting the criteria as learning disabled are higher then all other categories with a dropout rate of 42% more than a decade ago (Edgar, 1987). More recent data, from the National Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students (NLTS) reflects a much darker picture with dropout status for this handicapping condition, emotional disturbance with a pronounced dropout rate of 55% (Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005). Kemp argues the number approaches 60% (2006). A number of researchers have suggested that dropout rate be utilized to measure program effectiveness (Blackorby & Edgar, 1991). The emotional disturbance category makes up approximately 1.2% to 2.0% of the total population (Kaufman, 1989) while those qualifying for the learning-disabled category approximates 5% of the total school population and 44% of the special needs population (Lerner, 1988). 31 Urban areas, because of the high number of ethnic and linguistic majority coupled with overrepresentation (Hull, Goldhaber, & Capone, 2002) of these same students in special education programs, may see higher prevalence rates among these two disability groups (Cegelka, 1988; Trueba, 1989) when examining dropout data. The overrepresentation of individuals from diverse cultural, racial ethnic, and linguistic backgrounds in programs for individuals with special needs (Blanchett, Mumford, & Beachum, 2005; Bullock & Gable, 2006; Hull, Goldhaber & Capone, 2002) compounds these issues. Although African Americans make up 17% of urban school populations they maintain a 40% rate of enrollment in programs for individuals with special needs. There is an ever-increasing need for special education services for linguistically and culturally diverse students (Roseberry-McKibbin, 2002). Approximately 41% of all the seats in classrooms for individuals with exceptional needs are awaiting the arrival of students from diverse backgrounds (Hardman, Drew & Egan, 1999). Additional negative outcomes for individuals with special needs. Dropout rates aside, students with special needs face a host of barriers in their attempts to transition from school into adulthood and the world of work (California Department of Education, 2001; Kirk, Gallagher, & Anastasiow, 2000; Gorgiulo, 2006). Although there has been a great deal of focus in terms of expenditure and program development, for the transition of individuals with special needs, researched best practices at the secondary level are rarely implemented and fractionally sustained (Benz, Lindstrom, Unruh, & Waintrup 2004). All students with special needs, regardless of their diploma status, are in desperate need of programs and classes that bridge the gap between school and the world of work, a 32 universal destination for all students. As is the case with many interventions for students with special needs, and perhaps more important for this endeavor, because the stakes are so high and globally impacting, the sooner the treatment can be implemented, the more positive the results. Will (1984) reported that between 50% and 80% of working-age adults who report a disability are jobless. The transition from school to working life also entails a smorgasbord of choices surrounding career, independent or dependent living arrangements, social life, and economic goals that have consequences that last a lifetime; for those qualifying as disabled, this process is even more difficult. Examination of additional post secondary outcomes for students qualifying for the federal handicapping condition, emotional disturbance finds that 35% were arrested within 3-5 years after they graduated and up to 73% of those who dropped out were arrested. Focusing on between years 2-5 out of school, one third of this cohort was not employed, and 19% of those that were employed lost at least one job, the highest percentage recorded among all sub- groups with disabilities (Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005). This data paints a dark, dreary, and compelling portrait that the present system does not meet these students abundant need and it is failing these students. Strides have been made with improvement of some disability groups. Despite these changes, 46% of disabled individuals are still not working within two years of graduating high school and according to the researchers involved in the National Longitudinal Transition Study, one in five disabled youth, three-to-five years out of school, are not working and not actively looking for work (Blackorby & Wagner, 33 1996). Numerous pieces of legislation have been passed in the last decade to ameliorate problems and to facilitate a stable passage into adult life for individuals with disabilities (Furney & Hasazi, 1997). The absence of a cohesive, systematic model requiring major changes in schools, adult services, and communities has impeded this process .The sad, but stark, as well as accurate appraisal of the dearth and ineffective transition services for those with disabilities is noted. The fundamental, root, foundation of all schooling and learning should be to prepare individuals for life after high school (Wehmeyer, Agran, & Hughes, 2001). There is a profound need for all individuals to make a smooth transition from school to the world of work. The process is postponed for some individuals while they complete some form of postsecondary training either in a two- or four-year course of study. The universal destination for all ultimately lies in the world of work. Each group, college, or non-college bound, able, or disabled, early-school leaver, or diploma grantee has their own unique challenges they must face as they travel the numerous paths from schooling to the adult world. Student outcomes: Why they exist. The development of STW systems and the accompanying legislation has been a lengthy work in progress initiated on the basis of improving student outcomes in a number of different areas. Engaging students and teachers in articulated curriculums that increase attendance and decrease truancies and dropouts are a few of the anticipated benefits. Creating schools where those most challenged, those from diverse backgrounds, those that are poor, those that are at-risk, those that are not college bound and those that have a variety of special needs, are offered 34 acceptance in a learning community that has utility and meaningfulness is an endeavor worthy of investigation. The changing circumstances in the world and the workplace, addressed more extensively later in this chapter focused attention on international academic and economic competition. The issues and concerns involved in justifying and supporting this legislation mirrors in many ways, the same arguments that were instrumental in the introduction of vocational education curriculum in the nation’s schools at the turn of the century (Kliebard, 1999; 2004;Wiseman & Alromi, 2007). The outcomes students experience including poor academic achievement, the dropout rate, the achievement gap, and the difficult transition to adult life in post secondary schools or the world of work is related to the preponderance of disconnectivity between school performance and life after for many students exiting our schools in our urban centers (Neumark, 2007). The School-to Work Opportunities Act (STWOA, 1994) was enacted, centered on three areas of concern. These included the disconnectivity of school and work, the insufficient skill base of students exiting our schools, and labor market demands for higher order thinking, working on teams, and the ability to learn in the work setting (Neumark, 2004). An additional disconnect existed, one steeped in a historical context, the divide between academic and vocational subject matter. This legislation was linked to early vocationalism in the United States as it also prioritized integration of systems as a key concept. Those who authored and those who supported the legislation demonstrated the necessity of integration on a number of different fronts. It was important that the chasm between school and work, school preparation and skills required for the 35 workplace, academic and vocational subject matter, and work-based/school based learning be minimized or at best eliminated. The rationale for this legislation called for integration of systems approach where there could be a merger between school and work, workplace demands for specific skill sets, and secondary school preparation, and the vehicle would be the forging of academic and vocational content areas. Joint ownership of the federal School to Work office by both the Department of Education and the Department of Labor, could be viewed as a meaningful collaboration or an isolated symbolic gesture in building bridges across these voids. Those supporting and advocating for this legislation felt strongly that these mergers of contexts would be instrumental in maximizing positive outcomes for young people (STWOA, 1994). Teachers, researchers, policy makers, and numerous others have desperately tried to articulate and clarify the connection between how students are educated and how well it prepares students for the skills, knowledge, and behavior that are required in post- secondary institutions and the work place (Ryan & Imel, 1996; Hamilton & Hamilton, 1994; Olson, 1997a). This legislation stated that virtually all students, those from a wide variety of cultural and linguistic backgrounds, males, females, individuals considered to be disabled as well as those who are not disabled, along with those with their roots in urban, suburban, and rural settings, are in need of an educational system that adequately prepares them for life after high school (Barton, 2006; Olson, 1997a). 36 Transition, as defined by The Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition Unabridged “. . . is the movement, passage, or change from one position, state, stage, subject, concept, etc. to another.” The transition from high school to college, technical training, or into the work place can be a perplexing, difficult path to negotiate for the above-average high- performing student, who is typically college bound. Those who go on to post-secondary institutions experience difficulty in this transition as many face remediation, and a number of those do not graduate (Lee, 2000; National Center for Education & the Economy, 2007). Those who are not college bound have an especially severe transition from education to employment (Barton, 1997) “Between the ages of 18 and 27, the average high school graduate who does not enroll in postsecondary education holds nearly six different jobs, almost invariably low-paying ones, and experiences between four and five spells of joblessness” (Olson, 1997a, pp. 16, 17). These combinations of circumstances are often cited as reasons that contribute to the need and participation of post high school adolescents in our nation’s Community College system. Compounding this hopeless perspective on gaining meaningful, long-lasting employment, young people who see no productive role for themselves in the community, at that time in their lives, frequently do not graduate, contribute substantially to the country's high juvenile-crime and teenage pregnancy rates. These individuals are three and one-half times as likely as high school graduates to be arrested and six times as likely to be unwed parents (Schorr, 1988). 37 School and work: Isolated systems. From childhood until old age, two activities dominate the lives of most Americans: education and work. Yet educators and employers, despite their obvious interdependence, communicate poorly or not at all. The gulf between them handicaps business, wastes the talents and energies of millions of young people, and threatens our future prosperity as a nation. The signs of this disjuncture are everywhere (Olson, 1997a). School and work, linked in time, effort, and fiscal expenditure, have often been seen as isolated systems, whose disjointedness negatively impacts students. The void that exist between these two systems, school and work has also played in the forefront of student non- engagement in the school setting, the high numbers of school dropouts, and how ill-prepared students were for work. This estrangement instilled barriers between the world of school and that of work keeping students from making connections between the two. Educators and employers are operating in systems that are fragmented and isolated from one another (Olson, 1997a, 1997b; Ryan & Imel, 1996). Educators view business with suspicion and envy. The business community in general, and employers in particular, place little faith in the school's mission or accomplishments with the current track record of ill-prepared workers and lack of adequate transitional skills serving as evidence (National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce, 1995a; 1995b). “Each of the two major institutions involved, those of education and employment, seemed determined to act as if the other did not exist” (Barton, 1978, p. viii). Bridging this chasm between these two different, distinct worlds calls for a collaboration and a realization that they can no longer act independently (Halperin, 1994; STWOA, 1994; Stasz, Kaganoff, & 38 Eden, 1994). These isolated systems must collaborate and conspire in a joint effort to foster relationships that help and heal, as opposed to endeavors that engender distrust and alienation. From birth, early childhood through adolescence to senior citizen status there are no two enterprises that usurp the time, effort, and commitment to the far reaching enterprises of school and work. The K-12 system, technical training, involvement in the junior college or 4 year university setting and then a lifetime of work defines in a large part how we spend our waking hours. Schooling has a profound impact in economic terms. Education clearly is a form of long-term investment. It may be the largest investment we make as a society in human capital both in time, legislative and familial commitment, and fiscal expenditure (Wiseman & Alromi, 2007). Many employers in the 1990s echo the sentiment that today's schools do little to socialize individuals in behaviors characteristic of the work place (Hartooninan & Van Scotter, 1996; Lee, 2000; Olson, 1997a). Hence the impetus from the business community in supporting STW activities that focus on better preparing an emerging workforce. Most companies express fear of young people in the work place (Resnick & Wirt, 1996). In addition to academic deficits there is a corresponding dearth in their accumulation of social skills. Many employers report that young workers are inept in approaching work, lacking the ability to resolve conflict, or work in teams, all requirements of the 20th century work place (Marshall & Tucker, 1992; Olson, 1997a; Tucker, 1996). Individuals who are taught in the context of where and what they might be doing five years from now, benefit from the knowledge base surrounding the 39 occupational setting and involvement in being mentored socially by a significant adult. Involvement in these experiences has the possibility of ensuring connectivity between school and work. In terms of time allocation, dollar expenditure, and a number of other indicators, education, with its scope and expected connection to the world of work, should have comparative parity with this other human endeavor, work, that we invest so much of our time and ourselves in. The federal government and the states demonstrate a longstanding commitment and fiscal support to education. We school over 50 million students in America, and in terms of money spent, in some state jurisdictions, it accounts for over 50% of allocated state budgets, with some districts spending more than a number of Fortune 500 companies (Broad Foundation, 2006). Many including Hamilton, Jefferson, Dewey, Demming, and numerous others in the political, economic, and educational community have argued extensively about education’s importance, but still there is a schism, a great divide, disparity between these two entities, school and work. According to Reich (2002), we as Americans spend an average of more than 2,000 hours a year working and that appears to be increasing, surpassing the paid work hours of the Japanese, who are now working less, putting in as much time as the American worker did in 1980. Work, is an enterprise that many are involved in, and few escape. Studs Terkel, (1974) a seasoned writer across a number of different topics in urban life, authored a foray into the world of work in his seminal work on the topic: Working: People Talk About What They Do All Day And How They Feel About What They Do. An examination of a first hand accounts of people harking endlessly about their 40 particular jobs, and their reflection, Terkel (p.xi) opens with a number of quotes that address the topic of work. Included is William Faulkner who said: You can’t eat for eight hours a day, nor drink for eight hours a day, nor make love eight hours a day-all you can do is work. Which is why man makes himself and everyone else so miserable and so unhappy. Terkel (1974) also cynically questions, but recognizes the insight of Freud who wrote in his book, Civilization and Its Discontent “his work at least gives him a secure place in a position of reality in the human community” (Terkel, p.xx). Terkel, himself, reflectively adds that work in many ways provides for many individuals life’s meaning in addition to economic sustenance. These quotes provide a foundation of the stature, importance, and universal human common experience we know as work. It has been said that we spend approximately more than 30 % of our waking time, working. In its time consumption and in attaching meaning to life as supported by the thoughts on the subject by Freud, Faulkner, and Terkel, it is apparent, that participation and reflection in this endeavor is a large part of who we are, not as Americans, Indians, or Russians, but on a more universal level, as humans. Almost 40 years after Terkel wrote on the subject Bowe, Bowe, & Streeter (2000) followed a similar path based on his original work where they solicited similar stories of individual’s work lives and their reflection on it as a virtual project on the Internet. The results were so thought provoking that the experience led to a book on this endeavor. The following is an opening quote from Bowe, Bowe, & Streeter (2000) that supports the comments of the aforementioned authors and makes a definitive statement on this highly 41 participatory and reflective human experience that also anchors work to personal meaning and one’s personal identity. Our sole position on work is that it’s a fascinating topic and an elemental part of nearly everyone’s life. Along with love and your physical well being, work is the key to your existential circumstances: Who am I? What do I want? What is my place in the world and my status within it? Am I useful? Am I fulfilled? Can I change my circumstances? Work, defines to a large degree, your external identity of the social matrix-but it also looms very large in your inner sense of how you’re traveling through life (2000, p. x). A number of individuals in America view the path traveled from school to work as a disjointed difficult, treacherous adventure, with large numbers of young people in college bound tracts and non-college bound tracts unprepared for the work that awaits them in this emerging economy (Resnick, 1987a; Resnick, 1987b; Stasz, Kaganoff, & Eden, 1994; Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). Disconnect between students’ skills and workplace demands. The importance of academic preparation and the schools’ universal obligation in this process is arguably linked to the fundamental purposes of schooling. In 1991, the Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) addressed how changes in the high-performance work place would alter academic requirements and preparation. The commission's report compiled an endless list of requirements that included basic skills in reading, math, writing, listening, and speaking (SCANS, 1991). Technical skill requirements included the ability to collect, analyze, and organize data, identification, and utilization of resources, ability to work with others, and to understand and design workable systems (Olson, 1997a; Resnick & Wirt, 1996; SCANS, 1991). Other core skills enumerated by 42 the commission (SCANS, 1991), included decision making, problem solving, visualization, lifelong learning, personal responsibility, integrity, and honesty. Additional national reports (National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce, 1995a; 1995b), stressed a similar gap in these kinds of cognitive and personal attributes between what was needed by American industry coupled with the changing world’s economy and what was offered in terms of preparation by the schools to students exiting our high schools and post secondary institutions. These reports noted that the largest cause for concern rested with employers’ perceptions of personal attributes and that the lack thereof was the primary cause of poor job performance (National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce, 1995a; 1995b). Transition is a complex task as the issues involved add to the complicated process. A discussion of transition must touch on the purpose of schooling, the relationship between educators and employers, the mandate to change practices in teaching, learning, and assessment, and professional development in an attempt to make a stronger link between school and work to create better outcomes for students (ERIC Review, 1996). It is important to note that changes in the organization of work externally often precipitate changes in education and, at times, they proceed in tandem (Deal, 1990; Eisner, 1994; Fullan, 1991; Murphy, 1990a; Thornburg, 1992). Changes in the world, the marketplace, and the workplace have proceeded at a greater pace than have changes in our educational system, thus impacting the transition path for a large number of young people (Bailey, 1990; Clinton & Magaziner, 1992; 43 Denning & Metcalfe, 1997; Gordon, Morgan & Ponticell, 1994; Olson, 1997a; Ryan & Imel, 1996). Articulating and emphasizing the connectivity between school and work thus enhancing transition for young people also requires and beckons for changing philosophical orientation, structures in schools along with entrenched practices in teaching and learning. Teaching and learning shall both be based in school and the work setting (Hamilton & Hamilton 1997a; Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997b; Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). The emphasis is placed on learning from an integrated system approach, where contextual, hands-on learning is best carried out where it is practiced, in the work place. Theory is first introduced in the classroom and put into use in the workplace. It is clear that many experience difficulty in this process, using real world locations, for real world applications (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a; Hamilton & Hamilton 1997b; School to Work Information Center, 1996; Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). Ideally, industry and schools work together forging new practices in creating and delivering curriculum. This arrangement in many ways resembles the apprenticeship approach that is used in a number of other countries, most notably, Germany and Japan (Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). The dual system in Germany calls for employers to play a lead role in training employees by offering their assistance in curriculum development and hands-on contextual learning . Japan has a similar system where employers maintain long-lasting relationships with schools and individuals who develop school curriculum. Academic and vocational subject matter. Many argued that for far too long, academic and vocational subject matter were seen as polar opposites. This approach cast 44 a pejorative shadow on vocational education attributing to it for less that it’s due and relegating it to second rate or backseat status. The isolation of these academic and vocational subject matter contexts provided ammunition for those not supporting STW initiatives and others presenting obstacles in the implementation process. The integration of vocational and academic education is viewed differently by vocational educators, federal legislators, employers, and school reformers, each with their own specific agendas (Stasz, Kaganoff & Eden, 1994; National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1995). Vocational educators see integration as a means to improve the academic content of vocational courses; federal legislators view it from an economic, competitive posture, and employers state that it will improve the basic skills and new skills needed in the emerging work place (Stasz, Kaganoff & Eden, 1994). School reformers add that it may bring a degree of meaningfulness to the academic curricula currently delivered in our schools (Resnick, 1997a). High schools in the last century have invested a great deal of time, money, and energy to create three relatively distinct isolated curricula: college-preparatory, general studies, and vocational (Olson, 1996a). The STWOA, (1994) places a premium on discarding old notions of curriculum segregation where students acquire learning through a standardized course of study consisting of readings, lectures, written assignments, oral discussion, and limited hands-on learning in separate curricula and replacing them with integrated learning experiences surrounding broadly conceived career majors. Curriculum integration calls on a variety of models to accomplish the task of providing school-based learning that prepare students for the demands of an ever 45 changing highly technological work place (Curriculum Integration in School to Work Systems, 1992; Ryan & Imel, 1996). Jobs for the Future, 1994 (JFF, 1994) suggests three models of integrated learning in its toolkit for local program implementation including coordinated curriculum, project-based learning, and thematic curriculum development. In the coordinated curriculum approach, instructors in different disciplines teach related topics simultaneously focusing on occupational themes that have the capacity to link academic lessons, occupational study, and experiences in the work place (1994). Project-based learning finds teachers and students working together to solve problems in a particular occupation or job setting using problem-solving skills called for by SCANS, 1991, and employers in the work setting (Jobs for the Future, 1994; Kazis, 1993; Olson, 1997a, 1997b; Olson, 1998). The thematic curriculum approach, a technique often cited in school reform literature, organizes learning around occupational themes and dispels the distinctions and rivalries between academic disciplines as it calls on students to use perspectives garnered from both academic and work place learning. Forging the divide between school and work, the current skill base students exit schools with and what is needed by information rich, high performing work organizations, and academic course work and vocationally oriented curriculum calls for a system that can systemically provide better lifelong outcomes for students. The legislation created a broad blueprint for an integration of systems approach. 46 Essential Components of School to Work Programs This legislation has called for three essential components including school-based learning, work-based learning, and connecting activities that assist in the merger ofacademic and vocational coursework along with school and work-based activities. School-based Learning School-based learning activities combine integration of academic and vocational learning that includes applied teaching (National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1995). These activities are tied to challenging academic and skills standards established by the state (ERIC Review, 1996). Included in the activities are career exploration for students beginning no later than seventh grade and opportunities to select career majors and follow specific career paths by 11 grade (STWOA, 1994). These kinds of activities blur the distinction th between learning to think and learning to work, with the perceived outcome of students who are better prepared for the lifelong essential capabilities demanded by high- performance organizations (Drucker, 1994; Tucker, 1996). Other models and strategies that foster integration in learning embody career pathways, occupational high schools, magnet schools that are skill- or job-driven, and career academies (Grubb, 1995). Career pathways provide a sequence of classes, courses, or a field of study that prepares students for a specific job/occupation and also provides preparation in a broad occupational cluster or industry sector. Specific career majors and pathways allow 47 students to view their own education in a context where they learn and apply their academic skills and shape their future career goals (Olson, 1997a). This career path often begins in the last two years of high school and culminates with two years of study in a post-secondary institution. Career paths may be smooth and direct, while others are rough and laced with dead ends (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a, 1997b). Career paths will ideally provide linkages between secondary schools and post-secondary institutions. David Douglas High School in Portland, Oregon provides a prime example where juniors and seniors can take classes in seven broad areas: Social and human services, health sciences, business and management, industrial and engineering systems, natural resources, arts and communications or hospitality, tourism and recreation (Olson, 1997a). Occupational high schools are schools that are built upon specific careers and offer matched career paths. Magnet schools are schools that offer curriculum that is industry-specific and prepares students accordingly (Stasz, Kagandoff & Eden, 1994). Magnet schools center around thematic curricula (Kolderie, 1998) and are aligned with broad occupational goals that were originally designed to encourage a two-way movement of students in an effort to balance the racial population of inner-city schools, where they were housed, with surrounding suburban schools within urban districts (Glen, 1998). It is estimated that there are 2,433 magnet schools with 1.2 million students enrolled; more than twice the number of students who are enrolled in non-religious private schools nationwide (Glen, 1998). The widespread utilization of magnet schools provides a broad canvas/framework that is necessary in building effective, systemic STW systems. 48 While occupational high schools, magnet schools, and, to a lesser extent, career pathways, have been limited in implementation rates for a number of years, career academies, which had their beginnings in Philadelphia in 1969, have shown to be the delivery system model of choice and they have grown recently in their numbers and educational impact in California. Career academies are schools within schools, also organized around broad career themes, and often viewed as another school reform based on career-related experiences ( Olson, 1997a). These academies are frequently staffed by a small team of teachers from various disciplines and block scheduled in an effort to build students’ sense of membership in the academy community. Chuong-Dai Vo (1996) an assistant editor at Techniques, formerly the Vocational Education Journal, states that these academies are defined by three key components: The coupling of a group of students with a dedicated set of teachers, a curriculum centered around a career theme, and embedded links to the business community that give students work-based learning opportunities. Structurally and by design, these academies give students the opportunity to participate in job shadows, have adult mentors, and to engage in internships or other work experiences in summer months as well as throughout the school year (Olson, 1997a). Many have argued that the creation of academies may in fact be the crossroads between school restructuring and the STW movement. The California State Department of Education, that coalesced much of the thought in reform trends in laying out a blueprint for the design of the new American high school in California, suggested in Second to None that all students could be better served if schools were organized into 49 clusters around career or interdisciplinary majors in grades 11 and 12 (California High School Task Force, 1992; Olson, 1997a; Tucker, 1996). The career academy model reflects in many ways the thinking of many of America’s educational theorists and critics in redirecting the last few years of high school (Boyer, 1983; Goodlad, 1984; Sizer, 1992; Tucker, 1996). Work-based Learning As an adjunct endeavor, and in abundant ways a needed complimentary activity, this new method of integrating vocational subject matter with rigorous academic material forces a merger between school-based learning and work-based learning. Cited as a great pedagogical advantage of vocational education (Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996) learning by doing necessitates that the next step in bridging the gap between school and work. This would provide opportunities for students to act on what they have learned and apply it in the work place. Work-based learning experiences encompass activities across a wide continuum. The least intensive, often introductory, activities include cooperative education, distributive education, or participation in vocational courses, where students begin to explore working life without direct participation in work site experience (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a, 1997b). Additional levels of work-based learning experiences would include the integration of academic and vocational/ occupational curricula as demonstrated in Tech Prep programs (Lee, 2000) and at the highest level, where there is full integration of academic and vocational/occupational curriculum with active hands-on work site experience (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a, 1997b; STWOA, 1994). 50 There are a number of advantages in utilizing work-based experiences. Work-based learning that goes beyond the exploratory level of participating in field trips or listening idly to a guest speaker from a particular industry, teaches young people how to perform work tasks (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a, 1997b; Olson, 1997a, 1997b, Olson, 1998). Exposing students to the world of work encourages them and often provides additional motivation for them to learn more rigorous academics (Grubb & Badway, 1998; Halperin, 1997; Olson, 1997a). In addition to providing motivation and learning new tasks, students engaged in work-based learning activities also learn how to learn. This process is often referred to as “learning a living” (Halperin, 1997; Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a, 1997b). The message that management reformers, among them Peter Senge and W. Edwards Demming also known as the father of Total Quality Management, have expressed and persuasively argued is that all organizations, schools and businesses alike, should be learning organizations, builds a strong case for the promulgation of work-based learning opportunities (Hartoonian & Van Scotter, 1996). Paul Bredeson (2003, p. 101), who has a strong foundation in professional development in the training of individuals specifically in the field of education states, “On site learning facilitates the transfer and application of new knowledge and skills”. Hamilton and Hamilton (1997a) add that students receive additional benefits through work-based learning activities that comprise gaining personal and social competence and having numerous opportunities to receive feedback. 51 The concept of adults having the opportunity to mentor and students having the opportunity to be mentored indicates the mutual benefits to be realized by both adults and young people (Hartoonian & Van Scotter, 1996; Olson, 1997a). Work-based learning experiences reflect numerous practices noted in the German apprenticeship model (Stem, Balley & Merritt, Halpern, 1997; 1996) that are all but absentee in the current American educational model. Historically, “. . . the only way to prepare for work was work itself, at a fathers (sic) right hand, near a mothers (sic) knee, in apprenticeship programs both formal and informal or through on-the-job training” (Grubb & Badway, 1998, p.1), a practice that has its roots in colonial America and in European countries. Integration is a key word in School to Work system building. Just as there is integration between academic and vocational education in school-based learning, it is this same system that provides the foundation for integration between school-based and work-based learning (ERIC Review, 1996; Halperin, 1997). Learning takes place in many settings: in school, at the work site, and in other locations both in and outside of the classroom (Grubb & Badway, 1998). The community, home, and neighborhood should all be considered places to learn (Ryan & Imel, 1996). Connecting activities provide the substantive glue in this integration process. Connecting Activities Connecting activities are those activities that aid in linking the classroom and work place and help in coordinating work and school-based learning components (ERIC Review, 1996; STWOA, 1994). 52 These activities include (1) matching students with work place opportunities; (2) using school site mentors as liaisons between educators, business, parents and community partners; (3) providing technical assistance to help employers and educators design comprehensive STW systems; (4) providing technical assistance to help teachers integrate school and work-based learning as well as academic and occupational subject matter; (5) encouraging active business involvement in school and work-based activities; (6) assisting STW completers in finding appropriate work, continuing their education or training, and linking them to other community services; (7) evaluating of post-program outcomes to assess program success, particularly with reference to selected populations; and (8) linking existing youth development activities with employer and industry. The need for these connecting activities, the foundation of building systemic school to work programs, is born out of the alienation between the worlds of school and work (Barton, 1978). Successful STW programs reconcile the needs of employers (finding solutions, completing projects, and satisfying customers) with the desires of teachers (to teach students to master the basics) through these connecting activities (Elements of the School to Work Opportunities Act: Connecting Activities, 1998). These cementing activities are as varied as the School to Work programs under which they function. Even within local school districts, the types of connecting activities may not be standardized (Elements of the School to Work Opportunities Act: Connecting Activities, 1998). What does remain constant is the mandated involvement of all stakeholders in the process: Business, the public sector, non-profit organizations, schools, local education agencies (LEA), K-12 educators, organized labor, post secondary institutions, parents, and students (ERIC Review, 1996). A hallmark of successful programs is the active participation of all partners (Deluca & White, 1998; Olson, 1997a). These connecting activities help foster interest and participation. Among the activities are program coordination and administration, school and business staff exchanges, student 53 career counseling, and college placement (National Conference of State Legislatures). These different patchwork mosaics exist in an effort to link the classroom with the work place and merge work- and school-based learning components (ERIC Review, 1996; Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997a, 1997b; Olson, 1997a, 1997b). Fostering a climate where this type of system building takes place, the federal government provided technical assistance in this area as states, local districts, and schools begin the implementation process. Administered jointly by the U.S. Departments of Labor and Education, the STW Office provided technical assistance in support system building, synthesis, and dissemination of information. The result of these cementing, connecting activities that forge relationships is a patchwork of programs, projects and initiatives, each with its own funding sources, policies, and constituencies (Deluca & White, 1998; Elements of School to Work, 1998). Those programs deemed most effective are those that match specific programs within the context of unique needs of the local community. The success of any STW model is based on the quality of work based- and school-based learning opportunities coupled with quality merging activities that integrate all three components. The importance of these activities must not be understated if schools are to overcome the cynicism directed at them and the products they produce (Resnick, 1987a, 1987b; Resnick & Wirt, 1996; Stasz, Kaganoff, & Eden, 1994; Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996). Creating effective and efficient STW system building is no easy task; it is an ambitious project. Two institutions, that of school and that of work, are two vastly different complex entities operating on different principals and paradigms. At the same 54 time, each has its own continuum where methods of operating are as varied as the number of schools or businesses investigated. Truly effective STW programs have created strong, engaging school- and work-based learning environments that have forged an integration of vocational and academic subject matter and have utilized the intensity and hard work of the major players, including strong instructional leaders in creating relationships, a sense of community, and a commitment to enriching the lives of young people as they navigate the treacherous road from school to the world of work. The world of schooling and the world of work provide sundry complexities within their own specific institutions. Combining them in a meaningful, well-thought out, articulated manner increases the difficulty of this complex process exponentially. Vocational Education in a Historical Context A discussion of vocational education in America most look at the historical, political, and social roots of this movement, and the significant role it played as a precursor to the School-to-Work movement and the passage of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994). The School-to-Work movement, in many ways, created a bridge merging the conceptual precipice of vocationalism for a few, considered less intellectually able, versus academics for the large majority, as these two prior movements, early vocationalism and STW, morphed into the current context of Career and Technical Education (CTE.) (Neumark, 2007). One debate that has occupied the educational landscape and is important to any discussion on the purpose of schooling addresses vocational education (Hayward & Benson, 1993; Neumark, 2004; 2007; Weagraff, 1971). This is not a national 55 debate but an international discussion that takes place in all parts of the world (Gill, Fiutman, & Amit, 2000). Vocational education is a curricular option that has polarized groups and individuals for the last two centuries that often has been framed historically, in an all or nothing context: Should this curriculum be created and implemented for those less intellectually competent, or should rigorous academics be employed for the masses? Many individuals throughout history of education in America including W.E. De Bouis, John Dewey, and others offered arguments for and against these viewpoints. ( Kliebard, 1999, 2004). Among the many curricular offerings there is none more far reaching and dramatic than the introduction and promulgation of vocational education (Kliebard, 2004). Vocational education has evolved into an extensive and diverse enterprise in America and throughout the world (Gill, Fiutman, & Amit, 2000), that appeals to large number of students from a wide variety of backgrounds (Hoachlander, Kaufman, Levasque, & Houser 2003; Nata, 2003 ). Examining vocational education from the late 18 Century to present day is th essential to discussion of the STW movement, passage, and implementation of this legislation. This historical perspective of examining vocational education in America can contribute to an understanding of the implementation process and the barriers proponents encounter. The barriers to implementation of and opposition to vocational education has existed for centuries in America. 56 Colonial Period Previous to the development of school-based vocational education, there was an early colonial period when the purview of work preparation existed outside of the school setting (Wonacott, 2003). These experiences were both voluntary and involuntary, with the latter used as an instrument to adjudicate child welfare cases. This gave young people the opportunity to learn the 3 R’s, a trade, religious instructions, acquire food and clothing, and to be mentored by adults. An additional method, which has a long history that proceeds in tandem with the colonial period, was the most traditional of all apprentice programs, where children learned the trades within the family dynamic, from mothers, fathers, and extended family members (Wonacott, 2003). Long before the passage of the Smith-Hughes Bill of 1917, often considered a cornerstone and the legislative dawning of vocational education in America, there were a number of events beginning in the early 19 century that provided the foundation and a th subsequent evolution of the vocational education movement. 19 Century th The report of the Yale faculty in 1828 outlined that the two functions of schooling, discipline and developing the ability to think, were the sole purposes of school and this view was a reaffirmation of their entrenched teaching practices. Consistent with this traditional humanistic approach the faculty at Yale reiterated that Greek, Latin, and mathematics were the subjects considered valuable (Kliebard, 2004). Rote memory drills, unrelenting academic discipline, and verbal regurgitation demonstrated intellectual 57 prowess. Newer subjects like the introduction and teaching of foreign languages had little if any proven utility, and were not considered true academic subjects (Kliebard, 1999). An indictment of this rigorous curriculum approach was revealed some 75 years later when Helen Todd, interviewing over 500 children working in factories asked if they would have a choice between factory work and school, four out of five preferred the hazards and long hours of the factory, “to the monotony, humiliation, and even sheer cruelty that they experienced in school” (Kliebard, 2004, p. 61). In the latter decades of the 19 century there were four distinct schools of thought th that centered on curriculum that looked at the essential question of defining the purpose of school, a query that in current day is frequently debated. These four viewpoints included humanism, a focus on developmental stages of children, an adoption of industrial/efficiency orientation borrowed from the factory model, and the introduction of schools as harbors for social change. Humanism, the traditional view, championed by the faculty at Yale and other universities, was grounded in ancient traditions that promoted schools as institutions that teach the power of reason through the acquisition of a liberal education. The first curricular reform that challenged the status quo placed the natural order of the development as the child as the key focal point in decisions related to what was taught and the methodologies included. The second reform in curriculum approaches was a philosophical orientation that took the efficiency studies and techniques of industry employing them in instructional decision-making. 58 The last group of reformers involved in curriculum alternatives encapsulated the view that schools were the force for social change and social justice. This latter group saw social political inequalities of gender, urban corruption, and the long standing abuse of power as issues that, through curriculum, schools could address. Two events, approximately fifteen years apart, laid the groundwork for the contested nature of vocational education in the later half of the 19 century, the 20 th th century, and now the 21 century. In 1876, at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, st attention was directed at the Russian tool exhibit. Based on the need established by the Industrial Revolution reaching inside of their borders, graded exercises and the sequenced use of tools were introduced. This created a specific prescriptive formula for tool utilization based on systematic instruction. John Runkle, a mathematics professor and president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology felt so strongly about what he saw at the Centennial Exposition he created a secondary school based on this approach and the National Manual Training Model was born whose motto stated “Arts not trades; instruction not construction” (Klibard, 1999, p.8). It is noted that this was an adjunct curriculum that existed alongside the academic curriculum approach, not integrated with it. This Manual Training Movement was accepted by many mainstream Americans as it was a cause championed as a remedy to the problems diverse groups of African Americans, American Indians, and other outsider groups such as urban poor and immigrants brought to the American landscape. Those opposed to this movement viewed it as an instrument to control these sub-groups and use it as a moral corrective. This 59 movement encapsulated both the Protestant work ethic with an esteemed view of this enterprise, and believed it could also meet the needs of an industrialized society. Manual training and vocational education, often referred to as trade training, had blurred lines of distinguishing one from the other. Trade training was considered too narrow in focus and far less adaptable of being infused into the academic atmosphere of common schools in the 20 century. Manual th training gained respectability and acceptance based on the simultaneous exercise of mind and hand. Manual training won over the hearts and minds of educators, industrialists, and the public at large based on its social and economic utility. This National Manual Training Movement was not instituted without significant resistance. Charles Prosser, a vociferous proponent of vocational education, argued that The National Manual Training Movement, which had local, state, and federal fiscal support, could not adequately prepare young people for their life work (Kliebard, 1999). Supporting Prosser, The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) lobbied out of economic sufficiency in the last decade of the 19 century for vocational education or th trade training to be instituted in the schools. At the same time those in the political spectrum viewed this vocational education curricular approach as a means that could address matters of national interest, including international economic competition and superiority in other political spheres. Summons to change American schooling in the 1890’s resounded the same resonating cries in the passage of STWOA where a desire to compete in foreign markets with our country’s workers was hampered by the shortage of skilled labor (STWOA, 1994). 60 New approaches were emerging where industry giants created their own schools and had students change from one specialization to another making this training approach one where workers had not just general skills, but specific skills in a number of different areas. This new apprentice system unlike the familial strategies employed in the colonial period found large corporations such as Allis Chalmers and General Electric visiting the centuries old apprenticeship programs in England and Germany. Opponents of these apprenticeship program including labor organizations, educators, social welfare workers, the clergy, and others felt strongly about the social class bias and negative attributes. Labor unions, based on their self-interest of keeping wages higher with the supply of labor low were concerned about the various industries creating an oversupply of workers. Committed to their constituency of workers, the unions argued that this could depress wages. Unions at this time limited the number of apprenticeships to insure their membership’s economic survival. The National Association of Manufacturers, with its Committee on Industrial Education continually criticized common schooling in America. A clear sign of America’s common school’s failure at that time was that as many as 80% of students were dropping out before high school and those most impacted were the urban poor. Upholding the argument were the results of an education system needing to change based on the lack of skilled workers and the effects on international economic competition this conundrum of practices wrought. The American common school system for all, based on pluralistic ideologies, was in direct opposition to the countries that had established apprenticeships with abundantly clear, strong class divisions. This reiterates the same 61 arguments offered a century later, in the late eighties, in support of the school to work movement. The Committee of Ten, an adjunct committee of the National Education Association, adopted a policy that fostered the idea that there was no division of the curriculum of those going to college and those who do not. They added that education for life essentially is education for college. The Committee of Ten also faced challenges from the American populace who saw this general education curriculum that they advocated was only appropriate for those proceeding to college. Between 1862 and 1890 with the passage of the Morrill Acts this focus on public colleges and universities found institutions of higher learning being established in every state. These universities and colleges formed under this land grant initiative found an emphasis placed on agricultural institutes and teacher training colleges. The justification for this diversification of study offerings was the issue of access. Access also was considered in the development and creation of the American Community College with its clear focus of providing workforce readiness and the offering a wide assortment of classes (Cohen & Bower,1989) During the last decade of the 19 Century, secondary school became a franchise th offered to the masses. Data shows that in 1890 only 6% of students between fourteen and seventeen took advantage of this option. When surveyed in 1900 and 1920 the numbers showed 11% and 30% respectively. While the number of those attending secondary schools was dramatically increasing, there were a number of external forces contributing to this increase. The advent of the telephone eliminated the need for messengers, an 62 employment niche typically reserved for teens. With the loss of these jobs these young people had nothing better to do than to go to schools, and the move to the industrialized urban areas, made attending secondary schools more convenient. 20 Century th There were a number of economic, social, and political events conspiring in unison that laid the background for the emergence of specific legislation that addressed vocational education (Hayward &Benson, 1993). Based on population shifts to our urban areas in search of work there was a decline in the influence of the family (Kliebard, 2004) and a “. . . worldwide drift from religion toward education as the method of individual social restraints” (Ross, 2001). John Dewey recognized that the loss of family influence was a loss that schools had the tools to retrieve and it was imperative that they do so. One of the earlier curricular reforms based on the efficiency studies purported by Snedden, Taylor, and Thorndike (Eisner, 1994) used effectively in factories was considered an appropriate adoption for our schools. A number of individuals John Bobbitt, an advocate of industrializing education, and Charles Judd, a school psychologist recruited from Yale to chair the Department of Education at the University of Chicago solicited input from a school superintendent Willard in Gary, Indiana, to eliminate the waste in the curriculum and have schools operate as efficiently as our factories in our cities. Gary, was a city that grew in size due to the prominence of United States Steel Corporation. Creating a factory model in schools appeared to be an apt progression. Part and parcel of these efficiency approaches was extrapolated to have the curriculum 63 adapted to various unique classes of individuals, precursor to tracking of students in school. The focus on a new curriculum with its foundations in efficiency and utility was addressed by the Massachusetts Senate and House of Representatives in the creation of the Douglas Commission which gave the Governor William L. Douglas the power to appoint individuals to the Industrial and Technical Education Committee. After a long tenure of public hearings and the testimony of 143 witnesses from manufacturing, agriculture, labor unions, and education officials, it was decided that schools should take on the preparation of the students in learning and earning a livelihood. Dr. Susan Kingsbury considered an expert investigator examined the high rate of early school leavers and stated that they left school not because of economic sufficiency but because of their protuberant dissatisfaction of school, an issue often used to support the STW movement. In the beginning of the 20 Century those who still opposed vocational education th did so on the basis that it was a means of tracking students and that it had the possibility of dominating the curriculum for large numbers of students. The view by those in opposition was that this approach should have the status of a supplemental curriculum not one viewed as a replacement. Unions who up until this time vetoed vocational education on the effect it could have on labor supply and wages decided that their support would at least contribute to controlling it (Hayward & Benson, 1993). Compulsory education was seen as a means of supporting the unions’ campaign against increasing the numbers of those considered trained labor. They feared that 64 vocational education could be a training ground for scabs, those who replaced union workers during a labor dispute. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) encouraged three types of education services. These included day training for young children, evening school for adult workers, and trade training. It also offered training in the day, afternoon, or early evening for young people between fourteen and sixteen. It was important to American labor unions that this vocational education be taken out of the hands of private industry, specifically the National Association of Manufacturers and placed in the purview of the general public and public schools. The charge that vocational education be publicly infused into schools became a bargaining point that became a founding principle on the crafting of the Smith-Hughes Act, the first significant legislative federal funding of vocational education (Wonacott, 2003). Labor and private industry would be equally represented on governing boards with the onset of Henry Ford’s continuous assembly line, the introduction of new technology, the replacement of the steam engine by the utility employed by the electric motor and the waging of a Great War. The political stage was set for passage of the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917. As a result of passage of this legislation, large numbers of vocational teachers were hired and trained with 5,237 in 1918 and five times that number within 12 years. Preparation of vocational educators has a history of being problematic (Lynch, 2002). The bill allowed for the matching of federal funds and allowed for three subjects’ specific training including industrial education, agriculture, and home economics. Data on the efficacy of vocational education at that time was non-existent and this issue has often 65 been problematic for those supporting vocational education (Hayward & Benson, 1993). The public had little or no evidence that this curriculum approach assisted students with the acquisition of a job and/or career retention. The growing concern with the effectiveness reflected on a common concern in reforming or changing school, since the inception of public schools, was the public’s reluctance to pay the fiscals costs involved. In addition to the 1.7 million dollars allocated for vocational education the Smith- Hughes Act also created the Federal Board for Vocational Education, with its chief mission of solving disputes and to take on the task of administrating the legislation (Lee, 2002). States and local communities were mandated to match the federal appropriations working with the states. The Federal Board for Vocational Education worked with the state boards and was responsible for approving these plans created by the individual state boards. Over the course of nine years federal funding increased from 1.7 million to 7.2 million. Two groups who furthered the cause of vocational education, the National Society for Vocational Education and the Vocational Association of the Middle West realized their power and influence could be increased resulting in a merger in 1926, creating the American Vocational Association (AVA) (Lee, 2002). Through the lobbying of this new group whose number grew to 900,000 members, there was an agreement, the George-Reed Act, which increased expenditures of one million each year to support and expand vocational education in agriculture and economies. AVA president Charles M. Miller announced in 1931 “Vocational education in this country has grown in this country from an isolated number of small beginnings into a great national education institution” 66 (Lee, 2002, p. 22). He later queried his constituents in the AVA “Doesn’t it give you something of a thrill to know you are a member of an organization whose ideals are so high, whose usefulness is so great, and whose influence will live on throughout the ages?” (Lee, 2002, p.22). During the Great Depression and Post-Depression America the AVA laid claim that those best trained were the last to lose their jobs. Even though there were attempts to repeal the Smith-Hughes Act based on economic realities the AVA membership and those in the legislature squelched these attempts. Vocational programs preparing youth and adults assisted the country with a well-prepared workforce contributing to Post-Depression recovery. Beginning, with the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 which funded vocational education initially and the George-Reed Act in 1929, it was clear that on the federal, state, and local levels there was a fiscal commitment to education programs that prepared young people and adults in vocational specialties. Additional legislation including the George-Ellzey Act of 1934 and the George-Deen Act of 1936 provided a new source of funding which contributed to an expansion of vocational education. These federal legislative enactments provided approximately 100 million dollars between 1917-1940. Additional funding was provided by state governments and supported by 27 state vocational education associations who were affiliated with the American Vocational Association (AVA). The total enrollment in vocational programs was 2,000,000 in 1942, spread across different specializations including 35% in home economics, 30% in trades and industries, with 23% and 12% in agriculture and distribution education respectively. Twenty-five years after the passage of the Smith- 67 Hughes Act, 30 renowned leaders in education spoke about the relationship between vocational education and other important topics in general education and as a result there was a reorganized effort to merge effective cooperative relationships between vocational education and general education. Edwin Lee, first president of AVA and Dean, School of Education, at the University of California, Los Angeles felt strongly that an adequate program for work requires cooperation with government and private entities, school and non-school groups, employers and employees, youth and parents, secular and religious groups if these programs for work education were to be effective. A state director of the Division of Vocational Education in Maryland felt that the best candidates for vocational education were the young who were maladjusted, those meeting federal handicapping conditions, and those in correction facilities. The advent of conflicts being waged in other parts of the world placed the focus on those Americans who could, through retraining assist in those industries that would be considered invaluable in matters of national defense. In preparation for participation in World War II, the War Department met frequently with those in the United States Office of Education responsible for vocational education. Many of these discussions focused on training specifically for the defense industries in the mechanical trades and aviation. Soon after the Office of Education became involved in the development of a national training program, funded with 16,200,000 dollars proposed in federal expenditures of which 15,000,000 materialized. In 1940, there were 1,053 trade schools, 1,000 state and local supervisors of trade and 68 industrial education. Frontline instruction was carried out by 22,000 teachers who trained 500,000 workers that year. The onset of America’s involvement in World War II, on the day Pearl Harbor was bombed was an event that was conspicuously on the minds and agenda at the AVA convention held on December 10-13, 1941. The need for a surge in production facilities being employed seven days a week, 24 hours a day, and virtually for every year the war was engaged in was supported unanimously by the 26,000 AVA members. Agendas for the convention and topic presentations prepared months earlier were discarded and revised on the days between the attack and the convention’s opening day. The polarizing arguments waged for centuries both for and against vocational education put federal funding at risk. Without the recognized utility of vocational education for the war effort funding would have been terminated much earlier. A ten percent annual reduction in funds originally provided by federal legislation beginning with the Smith-Hughes Act found these original funding sources not sustained. In addition, funding for the administrative cost for the Federal Board was also terminated, and the board abolished in 1942. Vocational education was kept thriving based on the funding of the National Defense Training also known as the Vocational Training for War Production Workers (VTWPW). The end of the war in 1945 brought a similar sense of urgency in terminating funding for vocational training as it did in the creation and funding the VTWPW Program. With the symmetry of previous legislative funding and termination of the 69 VTWPW at the end of the war, the political pendulum moved with the passage of the George-Barden Vocational Act signed into law by President Truman in 1946. The beginning of the fiscal year 1951 had the George-Borden Vocational Education Act and remnants of other related economic legislation providing for 36 million dollars of funding for vocational education, and this allowed for more flexibility in the allocation of these funds. That fiscal year appropriations and the lessening of spending restrictions gave the nation a new interest in the growth and development of vocational education in the U.S. Throughout the latter decade and into the sixties there was a corresponding growth in response to a greater awareness of social interests. Many in and outside of government felt the obligation to help and support the underemployed, the unemployed, and the disadvantaged. Many of these same individuals were primarily black or poor white. Additional attention was focused on the cultural, economic, and social issues. From 1956-1966 there were sixteen pieces of important legislation including PL 87-72 The Manpower Development and Training Act, PL 88-452 Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, PL 89-10, Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, PL 89-287, National Vocational Student Loan Insurance Act of 1965, and a number of others that reflected a redirected focus in the area of vocational education. These legislative enactments were related to broader issues of manpower need, schooling at all levels elementary, secondary, post-secondary, and work readiness with most legislation reflecting the rapid technological advances in this time period, the decades of the fifties and sixties. Critics voiced opposition based on concerns that their laws did not readily address the needs of the slow learner, the handicapped, and the disadvantaged. 70 In the middle sixties the curriculum preoccupation was that of college preparation, that the purpose of schools and studying on the part of students was to acquire and gain “ an admission ticket to college” (Kliebard, p.221). Extrapolated to young people’s future clearly outlined that the purpose of secondary school was narrow in scope, limited to post-secondary training. The earlier forms of the American high school were built on a curriculum of control with a focus on punctuality, politeness, and conforming to social norms. Data accumulated in the seventh decade of the 20 Century showed that any time th during 1970, there were at anytime 100 million individuals working or seeking work. Included in this mix were approximately three million wives, mothers, and widows who would begin to make the move from working within the home to seeking work outside of it. What first began as a relatively isolated federal funding initiative in 1917 charted a course that show as of 1976 subsequent vocational education legislation served four million students, with an even division between young people and adults. The funding grew from 1.2 million in 1917-1918 to in excess of 250 million dollars when local, state, and federal funds were combined. Each state had a vocational education board to establish policy and distribute multiple streams of funding. Despite this funding and legislative focus it was determined that even in the largest cities less than one fifth were enrolled in vocational education programs, and even more disheartening revelation, two thirds of those completing high school would not complete a four year college degree. With close to three quarters of a century America’s experience with vocational education is one clouded with conflict and mired with indecision and a number of 71 opposing viewpoints. At the turn of the twentieth century this enterprise is one still in transition (Levesque, Lauen, Tertelbaum, Alt, & Librera, 2006). Questions abound surround vocational education efficacy. Is vocational education growing in stature and effect on students, communities and the nation or is its mission one in disarray and a state of minimalization? The period from 1982 to 1994 there was an overall decline in student’s participation in vocational coursework (Levesque et al, 2006). Reports such as A Nation at Risk in 1983 put pressure on secondary school to increase academic offerings. The constriction presented by hours in the school day made it impossible to increase these academic courses without eliminating the trade, industry, and business classes, the most popular occupational programs. Specific populations, black, non- Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander student participation rates stayed the same while students with Federal Handicapping Conditions increased (U.S. Department of Education, 2006, National Center for Education Statistics, 2006). The increase and identification of students with special needs is attributed to the passage of the 1990 Perkins Act, which placed paramount emphasis in addressing, funding, and serving these student’s abundant needs. This legislation, The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act in 1990, also known as Perkins II began to place more of an emphasis on overall general education reform. Sandwiched between Perkins II and The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, also known as Perkins III, the federal government in an effort to create a more viable system of workforce development, became entrenched in the passage of STWOA. 72 Much of the rationale in the passage of this legislation was the reiteration of rationale utilized in the enactment of the long litany of legislation beginning with the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917. The STWOA supporters believed that federal funding linked to creation and administration of these programs by state and local jurisdictions would more positively impact high school students’ outcomes in the last decade of the 20 Century and into the th new millennium (Stone & Aliage, 2007). Perkins II with attempts at improving the nation’s labor force through the improvement of secondary education and 2-year community college options brought to the forefront Tech Prep programs, curriculum integration of general and vocational education, and accountability by mandating states to report enrollment data and policy compliance (Hoochlander, 1995; Griffiths, 2003; Phelps, Parsad, & Ferris, 2003). An essential component of the STWOA was that this legislative enactment could create more systemic programs to bridge the gap between school and work for all students, not just limited to those focused on preparing for specific industries (STWOA, 1994). The integration of systems approach, between, school and work through federally funded school-employee partnerships, school and work based learning, all within the general education setting was initiated on the notion that students learn best by hands on contextual learning and then applying that to the realities of the workplace (Levesque et al, 2000). Many of the alternative structures that were implemented, including career majors, or pathways, career academies, and Tech Prep programs are still in place despite the sun setting of funding of STWOA in October 2001. The funding associated with 73 STWOA was always considered seed money with LEAs, state legislatures, and employers, once recognizing the benefits to supplement the cost involved (Halperin, 1994). Perkins III was a legislative attempt to broaden Career and Technical Education’s influence the curriculum approaches in secondary and post-secondary schools. Perkins III eliminated special set aside programs for populations previously targeted, within the context of allowing greater state flexibility for program development and expansion of CTE in a number of different areas. These included integrated academic and CTE, increased involvement by parents and employers, strengthen links between secondary and post secondary educational endeavors, expanding the use of technology and focusing on professional development. A theme developed and initiated in the passage of Perkins II put additional emphasis on increased accountability (Bailey and Kienzl, 1999). This legislation borrowed significant justification from STWOA in generating funding for all students, not specific population groups. The school reform associated with and a by product of an increase of CTE in America’s high school was predicated on earlier research that showed more positive educational outcomes for students enrolled in CTE coursework. These outcomes included a decrease in dropout rates, increases in involvement in post secondary training and improved attendance and grades. Research is not currently available which reflects on positive associations between CTE involvement and standardized test scores (Wonacott, 2002). 74 Distinguishing Between Vocational Education, School-to-Work, and Career and Technical Education Historically STW Programs have encompassed a broader base, with program implementation developed using a number of different vehicles. The broader context includes school-based learning, work based learning, and connecting activities that merge the two destinations where learning takes place. These different vehicles include occupational high schools, career pathways, career academies, cooperative education, job shadowing, and workplace mentoring through school based enterprises, internships, and apprenticeships. Career and technical education is typically defined as coursework in a specific occupational or vocational program, indicating a much narrow focus. Although there are clearly delineated differences between vocational education, STW, and CTE much of the academic literature has juxtaposed the nomenclature, where different authors will use the terms interchangeably. Neumark (2007) argues that school to work programs do not often specifically outline transition from school to school as in post-secondary training participation which supports the thinking that this transition has better suitability to be an activity in the review of CTE. The larger context of vocational education was through previous legislation including the Smith-Hughes Bill of 1917 and the STWOA of 1994, christened “Career and Technical Education” (Neumark 2007) Coher & Besharov (2002) suggest that the pejorative views implicating vocational education as an educational back water and school to work negatively with a perceived lack of academic focus allowed for CTE terminology to be considered a more acceptable and that ” career and technical education” presents a more positive vernacular descriptor. 75 The California Experience with STW and CBE The School to Work Opportunities Act passed by Congress in 1994 provided 1.5 billion dollars at the national level to support increased career preparation in the nation’s public schools. Funded for a period initially of five years it provided to the state of California in excess of 135 million dollars to encourage internships, apprenticeships, and employer mentoring (Neumark, 2004). The large number of students schooled in California, out of the nation’s student population of approximately 50 million (NCES, 2007), and their demographic makeup points to the capacity and importance of creating better life-long outcomes through the state’s program implementation. California, when compared to a number of other states took a lead position in implementing STW programs or using that state’s vernacular “school to career” programs. A large part of the funding went to general STC activities in the state along with career academies often called Partnership Academies and Tech-Prep, which focused on selected specific student populations. Although the state of California received an additional 7.2 million dollar grants in 2000 the initial funding of STWOA was not reauthorized. Despite this lack of sustained funding the state legislature has provided for funding lapses and the federal government has been a significant contributor to career academies and Tech-Prep. The start of the Career Academy model can be traced to one of America’s oldest urban centers, Philadelphia begun in 1969 (Stern, Raby, & Dayton, 1992). Four decades later this model is in wide use throughout the country with California leading the nation in this model’s current day utilization of career academies (Hoye & Stern, 2008). 76 California history, which dates to 1981, implemented the model first used in Philadelphia with schools within schools often developed within the context of a theme based on an occupation or career theme. In 1986-87 Public/Private Ventures carried out a study used to evaluate the academies in Philadelphia. It examined all student records that included students who entered tenth grade in 1981. All students who graduated that were enrolled in the three academy models evaluated were interviewed. This cohort was compared with two different cohorts. One group was made up of students from the high schools that took non-academy business education curriculum and all other graduates from three high schools that touted the academies (Snyder & McMullan, 1987). California had its two original Peninsula academies evaluated from 1981 through 1986 with two cohorts compared. Students new to the academies as incoming freshmen were compared with a matching comparison cohort who was similar in academic achievement test scores, ethnic makeup, and gender (Reller, 1984, 1985, 1987). Information was examined that provided data about the graduates of the program along with the comparative cohort. This was carried out fifteen and twenty-seven months after these students graduated. Policy Analysis for California Education later evaluated the first ten academies that were replicated from the original two Peninsula Academies. Examining the historical, economic, and social context of vocational education in America, a number of issues become glaringly apparent. The progression of educational thought on the subject has had a direct affect on the changing curriculum of the American high school and the arguments surrounding the growth of post-secondary schools for and 77 against vocational education implementation have been consistent in the last twenty years. The divisive barriers have always been framed and linked to the purpose of schooling. The arguments postured against implementation have often voiced the consistent refrain that vocational education should be implemented in a limited context for those less intellectually capable, as a matter of social control predominantly for those from diverse cultural, racial, and linguistic backgrounds. There have been arguments that have furthered the vocational education movement on the basis of economic benefits for individuals as well as national interests often linked to political and economic international competition and superiority. The proponents of the vocational education movement involve players from a number of different constituencies including educators at all different levels, politicians, labor unions, government, industry leaders, and the community at large. The numbers involved in the implementation of vocational education matters show large expenditures and often-high levels of participation. Collaboration between various sectors is essential for effective and adequate implementation. Federal, state, and local governments, along with education and industry, secondary school, and post secondary training partners contribute significantly to the success of such programs. Legislation has been consistently negotiated, renegotiated, enacted, and at times rescinded based on the pro and con arguments posed by individuals within and outside of the education sector. Many would agree with the high stakes involved that there is no long-term omni-present mystery to the discussion of many related topics including the connection between schooling and both the economic personal and collective potential involved. Vocational education and related topics have 78 been discussed analyzed, and debated repeatedly though not just America’s history but on an international level as well (Keating, Medrich, Volkoff, & Perry, 2002). A Changing World, a Changing Work Place Yogi Berra the famed baseball player and master of thought provoking quotes states in Colteryahn & Davis (2004, p.29), that: “The future isn’t what it used to be.” The high stakes involved in educating students at this period of time, with the internationalization and globalization of international markets, academic competition on the world’s playing field, and the current high school’s inability to prepare students for the world of work and/or post secondary training cannot be ignored. Coupled with challenges faced in our urban areas, the diverse student body served, those impacted by race, language, economic conditions, federal handicapping conditions, and the likeliness of them dropping out, requires all stakeholders to recognize that, business as usual, is an antiquated concept that could have deleterious effects on our educational system and the students they serve. Acknowledgement that the world and workplace has changed in many ways is critical to discussions on determining the purpose of schools and how we approach educating young people. It may be even more important and more poignant as we probe deeply into what changes do, we, as a country, state, city, community, and individuals serving students, make in our schools. Economic, political, and social forces have contributed significantly to the school change process (Deal, 1990; Eisner, 1994; Fullan, 1991 ,1993, 2001; Goodlad 1984, Goodlad et al., 2004; Hargreaves, 1997; Schlectly, 1997). Alan Greenspan contributed to 79 this discussion in Lewis (2004), where he provided economic and historical justification for the need to change schools at the secondary level based on the evolving world and workplace. An examination of the procession to passage of the STWOA 1994 reveals a similar history (Olson, 1997a; 1997b; Ryan & Imel, 1996). The transition of students from secondary schools to post-secondary institutions and ultimately to the world of work is considered disjointed (Delucca & White, 1998), particularly for minority students, those not college bound, and those with special needs (Barton, 1997; Will, 1984). Changes in world economic circumstances were not the only external forces applying pressure for schools to change. A long litany of government reports, including a Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), placed additional pressure and influence in attempts to change the way in which children are schooled in America. Many within schools themselves, educational theorists, teachers, administrators, and students, leveled criticism, attacks on every aspect of schooling, from teacher hiring, training (Darling-Hammond, 1988), financial equity for students, (Odden & Picus, 1992) and curriculum development (McNeil, 1990). The STWOA 1994, its development, passage, and implementation, rests on the shoulders of a number of these external changes including the dawn of the information age, globalization/internationalization of markets, collective changes in the work place, and demands for new skill formation. Legislation in the last century focusing on vocational education in America has consistently justified its usefulness and utility based on these same external issues. 80 The Information Age “Never was the expression, unprecedented change, more pertinent to a historical period than to the decades following the Second World War, a period in which the new and unknown became the norm—characterized by a multitude of unforeseeable events” (Report of the Independent Commission on Population and Quality of Life, 1996, p. 1). The trend has continued. Individuals live in a complex, tumultuous era. Changes have been, are, and will continue to be underway in our world, our nation, our communities, and in the work place (Deal & Kennedy 1982; Drucker, 1994, 1995; Quinn, 1996; Thornburg, 1992). The far-reaching, wholesale changes in the economic, political, and social landscape of the world conspired jointly to provide the impetus for corresponding changes in the work place and in the skill requirements of workers. Employers, responding in kind to these changes, funneled these demands to schools, the institutions often regarded as scapegoats, responsible for preparing the workforce of today and tomorrow (Reich, 1995). The global economy, world trade, and, in the micro view, the work place, are experiencing changes that are unprecedented both in their magnitude and speed. The industrial revolution and the information age have influenced changes in the amount of knowledge disseminated and in the structure of the work place (Quinnones & Ehrenstein, 1994). The information revolution has had a similar effect with the introduction of as much new information since the early 1960s as there was through all history to that time. The body of factual information is doubling every eight years (Krieg & Others, 1995). 81 The gargantuan numbers of personal computers in existence coupled with their ever- increasing capability is staggering and overwhelming (Denning & Metcalfe, 1997). A typical car has more computer-processing power than the first lunar landing module had in 1969. Technological innovations in virtually all aspects of the business world including banking, finance, and manufacturing, have been influencing the work place and its workers (Bailey, 1990). This emerging technology is seen everywhere and in all aspects of modern life. These emerging technologies are the engine that propels the economy through changes in communication, transportation, and information processing (Reich, 2002). This current information revolution and a manifestation of it has a profound effect on the U.S. economy and should shed insight on, an important mission and purpose of our schools, workforce preparation, as global academic and job competitiveness forge new emerging markets and create an incessant demand for passionate, highly-skilled, trained workers (Bailey, 1990; Clinton & Magaziner, 1992; Gordon, Morgan & Ponticell, 1994). Quantifying this leap into the information age, one only has to look at the availability, accessibility, time utility, and usage of the many devices that, provide voluminous information around the clock, and are an essential part of the fabric of our communication mosaic, not just in America, but also around the world. These devices include the television, the radio, the cell phone, the V.C.R., the D.V.D. player, the personal computer, and other information rich devices. Gitlin (2001) shared a glimpse of the availability of these devices in American life. His data collection enumerates the number of devices found in a large segment of 82 America’s homes. Evaluating these data, it is important to acknowledge there may be larger numbers of these devices in specific homes and less in others, and equally important is the recognition that access may very well be linked to economic capability. Gitlin (2001) found at the time that 99% of American homes had at least 1 or more television(s), 97% had 1 or more radio(s), 97% had 1 or more video cassette recorder(s), 90% had one or more CD player(s), and 70% had one or more video game player(s). In addition, these data examined the media soaked home environments of the U.S. population and found that 69% of homes had one computer and numerous other communication devices. It is noteworthy that this data was garnered in a time and place where the number of these instruments is growing in their numbers, and will continue to grow exponentially. When Gitlin examined the average homes of children from age two- eight, he found that the average home for this age group had 2.9 televisions, 1.8 VCRs, 3.1 radios, 2.6 tape players, 2.1 CD players, 1.4 video game players and 1 computer. The numbers predicted for this current decade would be staggering. With the flattening of the world many of these devices have foraged into other areas of the world for the first time, where they were conspicuously vacant, including the highly populated centers of the Russian Federation, India, and China (Friedman, 2006). This accumulation of data finds an equally interesting counterpart, when looking at the data uncovered by Roberts (2006), who carefully examined 1,376 U.S.Census Bureau (2007) tables, that outlined the amount of time, in hours, and in some cases full days, per annum, that American citizens self reported interaction with these same devices. He found that per annum usage per person for the television was 1,467 hours, the radio 83 984 hours, and the personal computer 183 hours. The full day data for these same devices indicates that Americans spend 65 full days watching television, 41 full days listening to the radio, and a full week utilizing their computers. Additional information articulated by Roberts shows that 97 million Americans receive their news from the Internet that 92 million report that they have shopped for goods and services on the Internet, and that a large number of these individuals actually made a purchase. The allotted time spent with this media was 3,543 hours. Comparing the time spent working per year, which approximates 2,000 hours, juxtaposed to our preoccupation with various forms of media, indicates that we allocate 177% more time to these devices than we dedicate to our jobs. On a daily basis Americans have spent increasing amounts of time, approximately eight and a half hours a day engaged in watching television, using computers, listening to the radio, going to the movies, or reading. “Estimates of exposure to television by the Center for Screen Time Awareness indicates that the average student watches 1,500 hours watching television and that the number of 30 second commercials seen in a year by an average child is 20,000” (Brophy, 2006 p.75). This data becomes more important when one reflects on Goodlad’s twentieth anniversary edition of A Place Called School where he pointedly gives numerous examples of where learning takes place in the year 2004, compared to 1984 when he first penned this tome. In 1984 young people learned at school and in their homes and within twenty years the learning field had been extended to a wide variety of venues, with many of those unfiltered and uncensored (Goodlad, 2004). The changing faces of information 84 and vessels for dispersion and promoting of learning can provide abundant insight in examining ways to change schools in America. The growth of computer usage can be gauged by the every increasing numbers of users accessing the Internet, which also cites evidence of America’s and the rest of the world’s immersion in the Information Age. Between the debut of the World Wide Web in 1991 and 1996, a span of just five years, the number of internet users soared from 600,000 to 40 million, doubling at one point every 53 days (Friedman, 2006). If processing Internet information searches is a barometer of computer usage, and another symbolic gesture of the worldwide preoccupation with this information generating phenomena, it is almost overwhelming to comprehend that between 2000 and 2005, Google, one search engine giant, went from processing 150 million searches a day to approximately one billion in a 24 hour period of time (Friedman, 2006). Much of the information generated and received comes to the world through the Internet. The types of information and its uses are extensive and varied. New business models are created each and every day as a result of the growth in this technology. It is a present day reality that X-rays taken in New York in the evening, transferred to Bangalore, India are read and a thorough report received in the hospital or doctor’s office within five hours. A preliminary examination of results indicates that the level of accuracy is higher than if read in New York, where there is a longer time span between when these X-rays are taken, read, and interpreted. There is a wide disparity between time allotment between capture and interpretation of this data and accuracy with poorer results examined in the city where the X-rays were originally taken. 85 Learning organizations and large corporations that include some of America’s best universities and recognized corporate giants are offering virtual classrooms, where coursework and training is offered on-line. With the use of threaded discussions, data, researched based best practices, and case study transmission, students, or employees in Bellevue, Washington, Barcelona, Spain, Capetown, South Africa, Montreal, Canada, or on a ship in the Bering Sea can communicate with a professor or corporate trainer in Waterloo, Iowa receive the valuable information, earn college credit, or make progress in professional development requirements. More importantly individuals from anywhere on the planet can learn a new, more efficient way to approach and ultimately solve a problem. This problem solving approach in its frugality, accessibility, and convenience may in many ways supersede the former approach based upon traditional brick and mortar classrooms and training venues. Globalization/Internationalization of Markets Changes of a seismic proportion in world economics are creating more global competition among a number of forces thus adding attention to the STW movement and subsequent legislation and internationalization (Olson, 1997a). In the last 25, competition for markets has shifted from within our borders to outside of them, an example of this globalization of the world’s economies. The work place looks much different than it did before as a result of globalization of markets. There are fewer jobs in the manufacturing sector, the population is aging, and immigration has increased (Ryan & Imel, 1996). Between 1950 and 1981, the share of agriculture decreased from 7.6% to 2.8% and that of manufacturing from 31.3% to 24% 86 (Cahn, 1983). Between 2000-2005, manufacturing jobs declined by 18%, with the worst effected industry, textiles, where employment fell by 42%. (Roberts 2006). Competition from world markets, particularly in the labor sector, has sparked innovation, efficiency, and excellence (Berry, Conkling, & Ray, 1993). Recent trends have shown a large number of U.S. corporations engaged in restructuring and downsizing (Quinones & Ehrenstein, (1997), with roughly 43 million jobs disappearing in the U.S. since 1979, despite periods of record profit. The increase in job markets in the U.S. has been in the service sector, often paying less and with less opportunity for advancement. Census data (2007) shows the job, which is clearly rooted in the service sector, that is to have the most growth and outstripping its closest competitor, is the position of home health aid (Roberts, 2006). Bailey (1990) argued that this shift to service oriented careers constituted a de-skilling process where workers were required to know less in the last two decades than their predecessors, but noted that this trend was limited only to the service sector. Bailey (1990) found agreement with Tucker’s opinion (1996) that changes in the structure of the international economy are leading to new skill requirements, particularly in the area of highly- technical, higher-paying jobs: Jobs that were essential if Americans were to be competitive in this new world economy. This globalization and internationalization of markets, where competition was at an all-time high, would bring about many changes, both in the way goods and services are produced and would stir considerable debate about changes in skills and where they are 87 learned, the school, and where they are exhibited—the work place (Bailey, 1990; Resnick & Wirt, 1996; Tucker, 1996). Concerns about globalization, which has placed America’s workforce in direct competition with much lower wage workers, who are also technically savvy in China, India, and other geographical areas in the world, points to the seriousness of this issue, an issue that will remain a priority for decades to com. It is no longer an internal trade off within the U.S. of high skills or low wages, but an international competition where citizens of other countries, have acquired high skills and they also have them for sale at a low cost. By the turn of the century, the collapse of the U.S.S.R., India’s access to the internet, and China’s focus on market capitalism, all events exacerbated by population growth, created a critical conspiracy of independent global happenstance; the result of which is that the global economic playing field has risen to 6 billion people (Friedman, 2006). China currently has more cell phones than the total number of people who live in the U.S (Friedman, 2006). Colvin (2005), argues that despite the attention given to this issue, and examining our lack of preparedness for this emerging global economy, that we, America, who may have the most to lose, are the least prepared. The changes taking in place in the globalization and internationalization of markets has placed the spotlight on international academic competition with a focus on America’s performance (Charlton, 2006; Colvin, 2005; Friedman, 2006; Jackson, 2004; Olson, 2006; Rotberg, 2005). 88 International Academic Competition Lemke & Gonzalez, (2006) in the U.S. Department of Education, Center for Education Statistics (NCES) authored report, The Condition of Education, mandated by Congress, examines a comparative view of U.S., students across reading, mathematics, science, and literacy of adults on the globe’s academic international playing field. The report, reflective of the U.S.’s interest in developing and carrying out cross-national batteries for the last forty years, uses a wide variety of assessments to capture its data. Additional measures look at school funding, participation in schooling across age, size, and growth rate of school age population. Other measures provide data surrounding characteristics of various countries’ educational system, students’ attitude towards reading, teacher working hours, and other indicators. The study makes comparisons between the U.S. and other countries that reflect similar attributes of the U.S., hence G-8 countries comprise the comparative cohort. These countries include Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, Northern Ireland, Wales, and Scotland (Lemke & Gonzalez, 2006). The country with the highest in Gross Domestic Product (G.D.P.) per capita, the United States, ranked first in per pupil spending, with expenditures calculated at 23% higher than its second place competitor, France. Positive outcomes are not necessarily correlated with fiscal expenditures. Data from the Paris based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2006) in a report, Education at A Glance, shows mixed results. U.S. students performed relatively well in reading literacy, fourth graders were performing at the mean, and eighth graders demonstrated signs of improvement 89 between 1995-2003. The United States, who for the first the half of the 20 century , and th decades into the subsequent second half led the world in the attainment of a high school diploma enumerating percent of working-age adults completing high school. This is no longer the case as other nations have surpassed the United States (OECD, 2006). Contrasting these results, in the U.S. 15 year olds performed worse in Math, on average than many of their international peers, and also on Math Application and Science Application tests. Other stark revelations show that the number of college graduates from China outstripped that of the entire European Union. Dire warnings citing an ever-present lack of ambition on the part of the youth in many OECD countries contrasted vividly with the parent push surrounding the importance of education, the instilment of work ethic values, and student receptivity particularly in China and India (Charlton, 2006). Friedman (2006) adds that there are many clear examples of this in India where students take school and work far more seriously than students in America. Last year Infosys India received one million applications from young Indians for nine thousand jobs. Who was in line for these jobs? These were the brightest and best that India has to offer with many completing highly demanding coursework at India’s own highly selective, highly competitive technical schools. Other applicants included Indians who received degrees from Europe and the U.S., with Masters and Ph.D.s in hand, willing to make any and all sacrifices to become part of this international company giant (Friedman, 2006). Friedman adds a new twist to the refrain regarding cleaning your plate because of the children’s predicament in other parts of the world. He suggests that American parents should admonish their children in a similar way regarding doing their homework. 90 Freidman (2006) believes that Americans should remind their children of the current academic achievement and passion, of children in other countries, particularly in China and India, and the effect it may have on American children’s future. Collective Changes in the Workplace Many of the changes noted in the world’s playing field have influenced the individual workplaces in our own backyard. The changing work place has, in effect, discarded old notions that an eighth grade level of literacy, coupled with a day or two of skill training on the job, would necessarily meet the training requirements for a lifetime of work in the manufacturing sector (Tucker, 1996). The workplace of yesterday needed to be replaced by high-performance work organizations that focus more on cognitive skills (Drucker, 1994; Tucker, 1996). Many more individuals are required to think for a living, to master challenging material, and to solve complex problems. The basic skills curriculum, aligned with the jobs of the 1960’s and 1970’s is no longer compatible with the required skills of the present workplace (McClure, 2005). The thinking organizations, the work places of the future, will view knowledge as a key commodity, adaptable to the barrage of changes encountered outside and within ever-changing organizations as they pursue new markets and new challenges (Quinones & Ehrenstein, 1997). "Success in this rapidly changing economy requires new business structures and processes characterized by flexible uses of technology and new forms of work organization that reduce hierarchy and encourage the involvement of workers in decision making" (Report to Congress, School to Work Office, 1997, p. 6). 91 These new work place organizations must be learning-intensive and are a result of increased international competition, recent technology, and omnipresent change in all institutions (Tucker, 1996). Rivero (2006) cites data from the U.S. Department of Labor that approximately 80% of the new jobs that will evolve in the next ten years will be positions that currently don’t exist. Outlining this phenomenon, Gioia & Herman (2005) address the changing contextual nature of the workplace as they explore possible future emerging job offerings including telemedicine technician, global work process coordinator, chief innovation officer, vice president of experiences, and others. The nomenclature alone provides support for workers to possess technological skills, be engaged in lifelong learning, and to use collaboration as an effective vehicle for tackling the tasks and problems encountered in these positions. Strategies to accommodate theses change include eight must -know trends that individuals will find invaluable, as the world and workplace change quickly. The trends, as outlined by Coteryahn & Davis (2004), reflect the changing nature of work and support the need for different skill sets of workers. The work place of tomorrow and some will argue today, is one where working collaboratively with information, diverse. individuals, and changing roles is a present day reality. New Skill Formation The information age explosion, change in world economic conditions, including increased global competitiveness in markets, have worked in tandem to produce a changing work place and have significantly altered the demands placed on workers. Employees at all levels, entry positions and management respectively, have discovered 92 that much of what they learned at school or on the job is now obsolete (Resnick & Wirt, 1996). Due to the changing nature of institutions and organizations, premium value has been placed on the employee's commitment to lifetime learning (Olson, 1997a; Quinones & Ehrenstein, 1997; Resnick & Wirt, 1996; Tucker, 1996). Olson (1997a), through the eyes of Charlie Coppola, a project engineer at the Proctor and Gamble facility in Mehoopany, Pennsylvania provides an example of the need for employees to be poised as lifelong learners. When he started at the plant in 1970, hand-held calculators were not utilized. Since that time, he has seen the progression from calculators to personal computers to extensive use of software-driven manufacturing facilities. Much of his time in the last three decades has been dedicated to upgrading skills in Proctor & Gamble’s own training facilities, having him recognize that even entry-level workers in this organization now need much more education and training before they enter the factory door. At the same time, they must be committed to ongoing skill-building to maintain their jobs (Olson, 1997a). The high performance, thinking work place organizations are desperately in need of workers who possess sophisticated technological prowess, cognitive deftness, and the ability to problem solve and to become involved in the decision making process (Clinton & Magaziner, 1992; Lee, 2000; Report to Congress, School to Work Office, 1997; Resnick & Wirt, 1996; Tucker, 1996). Colteryahn and Davis (2004) in predicting trends for the future, calls on workers to be flexible, more adaptable, open to change, and highly technically savvy. This new international economy, based on knowledge and information technologies, has been responsible for altering the job descriptions of workers in every 93 segment of our workforce, not just in the U.S., but also throughout the world including the Russian Federation (Masksakovskii, 2006). Rivero states, (2006, p.43) according to the Partnership For the 21st Century Skills: “U.S. students should be prepared for work, citizenship, post-secondary education. And one thing is certain: Technology-not the tools, but knowing how to use them-will play a crucial role.” Litanies of social navigation skills described by Goleman (1996) including self-awareness, impulse control, persistence, zeal, self motivation, empathy, and social deftness are equally prescriptive for successful workers in these new thinking, high performance, work place, and organizations. Added to this long list of qualifications are a commitment to lifelong learning, the ability to demonstrate technological sophistication, and the possession of a wide variety of human relation skills. Workers must also be sensitive to the changing cultural, linguistic, and mosaic fabric of America's future work place (Blank & Shipp, 1994; Carnevale & Stone, 1995; Chemer, Oskamp & Constanzo, 1995; Collteryahn & Davis, 2004). As of the year 2000, 85% of those entering the work force were predicted to be African-American, Asian-American, Latino, or new immigrants (Blank & Shipp, 1995). The number of females has increased in the world of work to 43% between 1970 and 1980 (Fine, 1995). More females and individuals of color, once codified by lower- hierarchy positions and labor-intensive jobs, were destined to find themselves in management and supervisory roles (Jackson & Ruderman, 1996). The non- Hispanic, Anglo segment of the working age population, ages 25 – 64 is in steep decline and the minority portions are increasing dramatically (Reich, 2002). 94 A testimonial to the value and recognition given to workers coming from diverse groups is the philosophy espoused by corporate leaders and directors of human resources in large multinational corporations as exemplified by Chevron Texaco, that “a description of best practice would include a demonstrated commitment by management that diversity is vital, critical, and is a corporate core value” (Young, 2004, p. 27). An emphasis on not just accepting but celebrating diversity is born out of the globalization of economic markets where many U.S. companies’ sales are generated in other places of the world. McDonald’s restaurant provides an interesting case study, where in excess of 60% of it sales revenue is generated outside of America (Cross & Conklin, 2003). If at the corporate top, international marketing is positively focused on the benefits that diverse people bring to its bottom line, it makes a strong case for embracing of diversity through its hiring, evaluation, promotion, and day-to-day interactions of its front line workers. Layered on top of technical skills, dynamic human-relation skills, and flexibility, workers must also be prepared to collaborate with and take directions from individuals who come from different, linguistic, cultural, and gender backgrounds. Success in the workplace of today and tomorrow will call upon all employees to understand and maximize relationships with employees from other cultures, races, countries, and those with substantially different backgrounds (Colteryahn & Davis, 2004). Passage of the STWOA, 1994, was a work in progress with changes in the world, work place, and skill requirements providing the justification as it developed. Many of these changes are interrelated, with no one maintaining sole causation. The legislation 95 inherently called on states and local education agencies to exercise flexibility and to articulate the School to Work tenets, matched to the needs of the individual local communities that these programs were specifically designed for. Additional external forces such as the media, and government's preoccupation with educational change, particularly at the state level, help the STW movement in its infancy. Schools are ripe for change—it is a large part of their history. In many ways, schools are the institutional scapegoat as changes sift through other economic, political, and social entities. The pervasive view that many young people have difficulty in transitioning, notably those from diverse backgrounds, those that are impoverished, those not college bound, and those with special needs, from school to the world of work helped to lay blame at the schoolhouse door. The Role of School Leaders in the Change Process The School-to-Work movement calls upon the need for creative, innovative instructional leadership. All of these issues may be summed in asking a second question, perhaps creating a larger quagmire: Who is in charge? The implementation of this legislative act, like many other calls for change, requires a focused investigation that examines school leadership. The nature of School- to-Work programs, which revolve around work-based learning, school-based learning, and making real the connection between school and work, require that principals take on roles that traditionally have not been part of their repertoire. Examining school leadership in School-to-Work Programs, is essential due to both the role a principal pays in the 96 change process, and the evolution of a skill and knowledge base that is a requisite in these atypical schools and programs. It is a new, exciting world for the principal. It is a world in which the only constant is an increasing rate of change. Dare the principal identify himself or herself with such a world and make it real in the school? Can he or she avoid it? It is not time take offensive? (Drake & Roe, 1986, p. 14) Although two decades have passed since Drake and Roe spoke of this rate of change and the effect it has on the institution of school, there is an accumulation in the academic literature that resonates this thinking. The effectiveness of schools and implementation of innovative programs is dependent on the quality of their respective school leaders (Caldwell, 2004; California State University, 2001; Marzano et al. 2005; Rallis and Goldring, 2000; Rossow and Warner, 2000). A discussion of school change with a focus on this legislation must also include cursory look at the changing role of school principals, seen as either an obstacle or a champion, who remain an all important player in the school reform movement (California State University, 2001; Rallis & Goldring, 2000; Rossow & Warner, 2000). A meta- analysis of leadership in schools indicates that a number of practices within these institutions are linked to effective leadership, including but not limited to clarity of mission and goals, overall school and classroom climate, attitudes of teachers, instructional practices, organizational characteristics of curriculum, and students’ opportunity to learn (Marzano et al., 2005). An inevitable consequence of a call to reform schools is the corresponding call to change the way in which schools are managed (Deal & Peterson, 1990, 1999; Drake & 97 Roe, 1986; Hall & Hord, 1987. As a result of attempts to reform school in the last twenty years, principals have been placed in the spotlight with a focus on their role in bringing about change. Managing a school with an assortment of fragmented tasks including pressing crises, unexpected problems, and constant interruptions (Peterson, 1986) is in itself a tiring job. Coupling it with the complexity of being a change agent only compounds the nature of a principal's work. A number of conflicts are inherent in the position and how time is managed accordingly. Caldwell (2004), who has accumulated a wide body of research on the principalship, based on observations and investigations on an international level, questions if it is not an impossible job? Contributing to the discussion on the difficulty of this position, Drake and Roe (1986) find congruence with Rossow & Warner (2000) as they characterize the role of the principal into two broad categories that separate two distinctive subsets of tasks: The administrative-managerial emphasis and the instructional leadership emphasis. Both of these roles accentuate daunting task characterizations, are considered intimidating in time consumption, and are also aligned in an historical context. The administrative role is linked to and steeped in job descriptions that date to as long as schools have had principals or teacher-principals. Many within and outside of education would adamantly agree that this role, and this one alone, outlines the role and responsibilities of the principalship. Many current principals, in playing it safe, not consciously focused on improving schools, may also find substantive respite in ignoring the role of instructional leader that requires them to take on the difficult issues and asking 98 the uncomfortable questions that are expected of leaders in our schools in the 21st century. (Daggett & McNulty, 2005) This latter role, of instructional leadership and one of a corresponding change agent, is a recent one that traces its origin to current reform movements in the last three decades. Administrative-Managerial Emphasis The administrative-managerial emphasis encompasses many of the day-to-day activities including maintaining records, preparation of reports, budget development, personnel administration, scheduling, pupil accounting, and facilities management. Principals' work is time-consuming and multi-task oriented (Peterson, 1986). Most of the principal’s time is spent on tasks that relate to maintaining order and can be classified as administrative housekeeping (Fullan, 1991). The realities of principals' work find many individuals overwhelmed (Schainker & Roberts, 1997). Fullan, (2003,p. 23) succinctly sums up the demands placed on principals: “The principalship is the kind of job where you are expected to be all things to all people.” The duties of a principal are constantly evolving, expanding, and increasing. Tasks are conspicuously added to, while others, previously mandated, are never eliminated (Rayfield & Diamantes, 2004). “According to a dominant modern myth, a school principal is an underpaid workhorse juggling the conflicting demands of instructional leadership, bureaucracy, official mandates, and adverse interest groups” (Howley, Andrianavio, & Perry, 2005, p.762). Reflecting on this assumption, is the mythical twist related to monetary compensation or the outlined limited task delineation? Bosson, in Drake and Roe (1986) asserts that 85% of a principal's time is currently devoted to operating the school plant, 99 discipline, and paperwork. Cuban (1988), examining fifteen studies conducted from 1911 to 1980 on how principals spent their time, found virtually all of those investigated spent the majority of their time on administrative-managerial tasks. Boyd and Crowson, in Hanson's (1991) book Educational Administration and Organizational Behavior agree that administrators give most of their attention to managing the school and pupil control, with little time left for the important task of being an instructional leader. Instructional Leader Emphasis As an adjunct to the administrative managerial role, and in light of demands for school reform forged from a number of different constituencies, a role highlighted is that of an instructional leader. This role includes establishing a vision, creating a positive school climate, stimulating staff, linking school and community, evaluating and implementing curricular and instructional innovations, and, lastly, assessing these innovations (Drake & Roe, 1986). Among the many time consuming task of instructional leaders’ wide purview of responsibilities includes the mentoring, induction, empowering, and ultimately, retention of teachers (Watkins, 2005). The emphasis on the instructional leadership dimension traces its roots to the effective schools movement. Subsequent reform efforts contributed to the view that instructional leadership is a priority for school administrators. Large numbers of administrators place program development, clearly a time allotment delineated in the instructional leadership role, as a number one priority- ironically; it is superseded by school management tasks. Those eager to press for change in schools and the principalship agree that the school leadership/change agent role is an essential component 100 in bringing about reform in schools. Hall & Hord (1987) caution that although the principal has received most of the attention in the literature on change and educational improvement, they must rely on collaboration within their organizational structure to be successful. Finn & Kanstoroom, (2000), state that, for principals to be effective, they must be regarded as CEOs rather than relegated to middle-manager status. Deal & Peterson (1999) counter by placing the focus again on the principals’ shoulders when discussing an important facet in the change process, creating a school culture. Lyman (2000) offers a perspective that transcends these two roles when she writes extensively of the practices and challenges of caring leadership, an affective attribute, that can contribute to positive outcomes in carrying out these juxtaposed task responsibilities. Caring leaders create positive climates and induce learning communities to be open to change. The principal is key to building a strong school culture. Taking on the role of a school principal the beginning of the 21st century, with incessant demands from a variety of factions to change schooling in America, places more accountability than ever. This view is dominated in the academic literature that only strong, effective instructional leaders, can foster real change. Principals versed and versatile in their roles as instructional leaders and as agents of change are the key to ushering in new perspectives on teaching and learning. Risks are high in this high stakes scenario where playing it safe puts students at risk when leaders run from the imperative to be willing to lead the change process (Daggett & McNulty, 2005). Accolades are given to those who take risks based on a 101 moral obligation to create better outcomes for students, while those who don’t, are often ignored, but rarely punished (Fullan, 2003). A systematic change initiative outlined in the STWOA 1994 mandates system building among industry, labor, communities, students, and teachers. Those in leadership positions must provide connecting activities that are the substance in cementing relationships. Once again stakeholders from all constituencies that include the government, the public, the media, and those within schools, teachers, parents, and students are anticipating change. The focus continues to remain on principals' ability to lead, to provide a vision for this change, to articulate it, and ultimately to implement it (California State University, 2001; Eisner, 1994; Fullan, 1991). This may require different skills, knowledge base, fit and image, that are much different than the traditional role of the secondary school principal. Summary Change has been a constant companion of schooling in America as it has evolved in the last two centuries. Calls for change directed at the schoolhouse door have come from the business community, state and federal government, media, teachers, parents, and students. The purpose of schooling is central to debate on the why, what, and how we change schools. Much of the cynicism was based on conditions in schools (truancy, declining rates of academic achievement, and increases in the number of dropouts and early school leavers). Compounding the schools’ mission were wholesale demographic changes in the schools’ population as education has been franchised to all segments of our society. 102 With approximately 25% of children living in poverty, large numbers of children of color, and those with first language issues lagging behind their Anglo counterparts in academic achievement and experiencing higher dropout rates, the calls for change have been exacerbated. Many urban school districts pupil census data shows over half of its population are students with first language issues and/or are people of color. Other urban districts throughout the state of California and the U.S. reflect similar demographics. In addition, there are large numbers of students, those typically not college bound and those with special needs, that have an especially difficult time in transitioning from school to the world of work. Those that go on to college also experience difficulty in that setting and the transition process. In the forefront of the school reform movement is the primary change agent at the school site—the school principal. The challenges these individuals face are overwhelming, with the majority of their time spent managing the physical and fiscal management of the respective site: Unfortunately, leading at times is subservient to managing. America has an extensive and divisive history with vocational education. Beginning in the earlier colonial period with familial apprenticeships to the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, the topics including the purpose of school, the populations best served with the various vocational education models, and questions about program effectiveness have created a highly contested debate around these issues. The STWOA was passed in 1994 in an attempt to build a system that answers one sentiment of those calling for schools to change in altering the quality of the individuals—that each will possess the ability to produce and meet the work requirements 103 set by future employers—that exit these institutions. Many employers are afraid of young people entering the work force. The business community felt that, because of changes in the world and work place, students did not exit schools with the skills necessary in the evolving high-performance, information-breeding work places of today and, more importantly, tomorrow. Schools did little to prepare students for the social milieu that exists in the work place, including getting along with others from different ethnic backgrounds or taking directions from females and those from traditionally minority backgrounds in management positions. Team building and problem solving skills were often absent among those exiting our high schools. It appears that this legislation is a culmination of the persistent, consistent debate about vocational education and legislative enactment spanning the last century. Sizer, Tucker, and others have written extensively on the purpose of school and the importance of work and its relationship to academic preparation. Successful transition to adult life is clearly a manifestation of one’s preparation, particularly at the secondary level. The STWOA of 1994 contains three essential elements: School-based learning, work based learning, and activities that help form bonds and relationships between school, businesses, employers, teachers, students, and numerous other agencies. Different states or districts will utilize a wide variety of activities in an effort to better prepare exiting students for the nuances and challenges faced in the world of work. Some of the different vehicles used in the mission include Tech Prep Programs, Career Academies, Integration of Vocational and Academic subject matter, active mentoring by adults in job shadowing and work experience programs. The most effective STW systems utilize the 104 formats that best reflect the needs of the individual school sites, and the communities they reside in. The literature is abundant with accolades directed toward programs that help merge heart, head, and hand that better prepare students for the emerging high- performance work place but the implementation of these programs appears disjointed. We school over 50 million children in America but comparatively just a few experience the benefits of a bona fide STW System. This investigation looks at the principal and central office administrators’ role in this process. Key to the discussion is awareness, skills, and practices on the part of the principal, the instructional leaders, perceptions of the tenets of this legislation, and most important, the implementation process at individual school sites. Results from this investigation may provide insight and direction in the utilization and implementation of this legislation for other urban districts considering School-to- Work programs. Chapter III will focus on the methodology utilized in this study. 105 Chapter III Methodology Some say, “It is no coincidence that the question mark is an inverted plow, breaking up the hard soil of old beliefs and preparing for new growth” (Alinsky, 1971, p. 4). Overview This chapter outlines the design, sample, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis used in this study. The purpose of this study was to investigate the School-to-Work programs in urban centers throughout the state of California. Instructional leaders and central office administrators participated in the study in an effort to examine implementation of such programs. There were four school districts that managed. School-to-Work programs located in urban centers in California. Based on willingness and agreement of central office administrators these districts were selected to answer the four research questions. A multimethod approach (Brewer & Hunter, 1989) utilizing quantitative and qualitative descriptive case study research methodology was used to provide an in-depth look at these School-to-Work programs. Instrumentation included surveys and interviews in an effort to gather meaningful data from those involved in these programs. Research Question 1. What role do instructional leaders and central office administrators play in the implementation of School-to-Work programs? 2. What barriers had to be overcome in the process? 106 3. What skills, knowledge base, and practices of school leadership contribute to the implementation or non-implementation of School to Work programs? 4. What specific data is there that indicates and supports better outcomes for students enrolled in School to Work programs? The questions selected were the foundation for the development of the instruments that were administered, the methodology utilized, the data collection undertaken, analysis, and ultimately the discussion of the data in this investigation’s concluding chapters. The issues presented in the review of literature, the research questions asked and the inherent intricacies involved in this investigation suggest a methodological approach that can provide for, and best serve those in the educational arena. After careful consideration, investigation, and reflection, it became apparent that a multi method approach using both quantitative and qualitative schema would best meet the criteria of providing meaningful benefits for those most profoundly affected by these issues: students, teachers, instructional leaders, and the community at large. “Ultimately, the basic reason for teachers doing research is to address the central educational issues and concerns of the day” (Fischer, 2001, p. 30). Recanting quantitative measures exclusively that can purport to elucidate implementation rates of the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994) can only tell a small, shallow part of the tale, where a reflective, ethnographic look at those in instructional leadership/change agent roles can yield a plethora of results that provide utility for these stakeholders including foremost, school districts who demonstrate a clearly articulated need for School-to-Work programs. 107 This need is reflected in decreased graduation rates, decreased attendance rates for students and staff, excessive disciplinary action, widening achievement gaps among diverse learners and their Anglo counterparts, and an unsuccessful transition from secondary school to college and ultimately the world of work for large numbers of students but especially for diverse learners and individuals with special needs. Many urban school districts in California and throughout the country abundantly demonstrate this need. In addition, this information was garnered from those in settings where the implementation of this legislation was successfully implemented and is currently serving students in excess of a decade after the STWOA Legislative Act was enacted. This runs tangent to one of the underlying purposes of a qualitative approach: to acquire insight and understanding of the setting where the behavior occurs (Burnaford, Fischer, & Hobson, 2001). Research Design Making sense involves organizing the undisciplined confusion of events and the experiences of those who participate in those events as they occur in natural settings (Moorse & Richards, 2002). The qualitative approach has been written about extensively (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Marshall & Rossman, 2006; Morse & Richards, 2007; Wallen & Fraenkel, 2001). The essence of the process can be simplified to collecting data, what they said, making sense of it, looking for patterns or themes, and placing in perspective, integrating what different people have said. Those in that setting provide a conduit as that information is collected. 108 The concepts of methodological purposiveness, selecting a particular methodology or a combination of methodologies that is best suited to a problem, combined with methodological congruence where the topic, the review of literature, the research questions, and data collected steer a course for specific methodologies provide additional impetus for a multi method approach (Moorse & Richards, 2002). Particular significance is recognized when one views the emergent themes uncovered in this research: (1) the changing world and work place, (2) the inevitable changing classroom and schools at the secondary level, (3) the often unsettling transition to adult life, (4) the changing principal’s role as instructional leader/change agent/manager and, (5) achievement gaps within the cultural mosaic of American schools. Through the use of qualitative and quantitative protocol it becomes clear how these topics are related to the development, passage, articulation, and, lastly, implementation of policy, in essence an example of theory into practice. The multi method approach was selected for the following reasons. The research questions require it, and the data collected demands it (Morse & Richards, 2002). Sample In an attempt to examine School-to-Work programs in urban school districts in the state of California purposeful sampling techniques were initiated. Purposeful sampling can include a wide range of sampling strategies including homogeneous sampling, typical case sampling, criterion sampling, extreme or deviant (outlier) sampling and others (Patton, 2003). The focus of this investigation was on School-to-Work programs, hence the alignment with extreme or deviant (outlier) sampling is mandated. 109 Looking at these programs can provide abundant insight for other urban school districts as they face the inherent challenges of recognizing the need for change, acting on it, and implementing it. The sample of instructional leaders and central office administrators involved in School to Work programs in urban school districts in the state of California, were selected by first examining extensive statewide data maintained by the California Department of Education (2007). Utilizing CBEDS, (California Basic Educational Data System), and supplemented with additional data criteria from the Statistical Abstract of the United States (2007), districts were then selected using the following criteria: 1. Districts were only selected if they were a high school, county, or unified district type as defined by California Ed-Data Glossary of Terms. Elementary school districts were excluded from the sample. 2. These high school, county, and unified school districts were further stratified by selecting only those districts that met the population status outlined by the U.S. Census Bureau designation of size including large city, mid-size city, urban fringes of large city, and urban fringes of mid-size city criteria outlined below: · Large City: a central city of a Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA) with 250,000 people or more. · Mid-size City: a central city of a CMSA or Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), with less than 250,000 people. 110 · Urban Fringes of Large City: any incorporated place, Census Designated Place, or non-place territory within a CMSA or MSA of a Large city and defined as urban by the Census Bureau. · Urban Fringes of Mid-size City: any incorporated place, Census Designated Place, or non-place territory within a CMSA or MSA of a Mid-size City and defined as urban. Districts and their schools in large towns, small towns, or in rural areas, outside of a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) were excluded from the study. The selection of participants for this study was randomized by the following methods: 1. Districts selected were alphabetized backwards (Z and be assigned ordinal numbers (1,2,3…). 2. A random number table was utilized that included numbers 1-50. 3. Districts were assigned a random number. 4. Districts were selected based on this random table, with the first four districts that had Site Administrators and Central Office Administrators agreeing to participate in the study making up the cohort administered the instrumentation used in this study. Utilizing this criteria, districts were selected that created various formats (Career academies, tech prep programs, small learning, communities, and others) as outlined by the STWOA (1994). Discretion regarding development and implementation was based on needs of the local areas. The legislation (STWOA) contained provisions initiated by collaboration of the Department of Labor and Department of Education at the federal 111 level for states and ultimately local jurisdictions to create programs based on their unique needs. District websites provided the vehicle to access their respective programs, including instructional leaders at the site level and central office administrators. All of the programs and districts selected shared essential components of STW programs, school-based learning, work-based learning, and connecting activities. Outlined in Table 1 there were 14 district central office staff members and 21 instructional leaders that were solicited to participate in the study. These individuals were contacted by e-mail, United States Postal Service (U.S.P.S.) and phone. In some instances a combination of these strategies were utilized with a focus on increasing the number of participants in the study. Acquiring participants that were both site instructional leaders and central office staff from within the same school district were considered an essential component of the study. The two cohorts of those involved in the study consisted of three site instructional leaders and four central office administrators. Table 1: Study Contacts and Participants Contacts Number Instructional Leaders Contacted 21 Cental Office Administrators Contacted 14 Final Sample Size Participants Who Agreed to Participate in Study Instructional Leaders 3 Central Office Administrators 4 112 1. Instructional Leaders Site-based instructional leaders of effective School-to-Work programs were selected to participate in this study. The academic literature is rich and abundant in describing these individuals as key change agents in school programs (California State University, 2001; Hall & Hord, 1987; Rallis & Goldring, 2000; Rossow & Warner, 2000). Many have said that the implementation or non-implementation of innovative approaches may rest squarely on the shoulders of these individuals (Eisner, 1994). 2. Central Office Administrators Administrators at the district level who have contributed to the implementation process were identified through analysis of information garnered on specific districts’ Internet websites. Successful implementation requires fiscal and non-fiscal support from central office staff. Their insight is important particularly in light of the absence of federal funding and questionable program sustainability based on lack of federal fiscal support. As outlined in Table 2 the respondents in their respective school districts and sites had distinctive titles. Note that there were program managers, directors, and principals who were in leadership roles at the central office. Site instructional leaders were also labeled with a variety of titles, with principal in a school within a school, principal on special assignment, or principal/director. Instrumentation “Good research involves creatively designing ways of using inquiry methods to face research questions” (Knight, 2002, p.119). Viewing phenomena, systems through a number of different lenses provides the researcher with the ability to look at real world 113 events with added perspective. That perspective is broadened when both quantitative and qualitative methods are employed in measuring data collected. A number of different research instruments will be utilized in this study. These will include interviews and surveys. Table 2: Study Coded Titles Aligned with District Title District (Coded) Alpha I Beta I Delta I Gamma I Study Title Site Instructional Leaders Site Instructional Leaders Site Instructional Leaders Site Instructional Leaders District Title Principal Principal on Special Assignment Principal/Director Not Applicable District (Coded) Alpha II Beta II Delta II Gamma II Study Title Central Office Central Office Central Office Central Office District Title Principal, District Level Director II, Career and Technical Preparation Administrator, Career and Technical Education Director, Career Development and Adult Education These three instruments which were created specifically for this study include the Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.), the Instructional Leaders’ Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.), and the Survey of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.) These instruments can be found in Appendices A, B, and C. The development of these instruments was directly related to their efficacy in contributing to answering the research questions posed. The first research question examining the role of instructional leaders and central office administrators in the implementation is specifically asked in both the C.O.I.P. and the I.L.I.P. Additional questions in these two instruments give both Site Instructional Leaders and Central Office 114 Administrators the opportunity to elaborate on the barriers to implementation of School- to-Work programs as queried in research question two. This question’s importance is demonstrated by the protracted history of barriers presented for two plus centuries in arguments against the implementation of many vocational programs that were the precursor to the S.T.W movement. Research question three looks at the skills, knowledge base, and practices of school leaders and how that contributes to program implementation. Information related to this research question is garnered in the administration and responses of all three instruments, the C.O.I.P., I.L.I.P., and the S.I.L. Specific data that indicates and supports better outcomes for students enrolled in STW programs, which is the essence of research question 4 was uncovered in responses for both the C.O.I.P. and the I.L.I.P. Respondents provided antidotal perceived benefits on the part of students, employers, and students as well as studies that demonstrated specific data. Interviews Although interviews may appear simplistic and self-evident, the effective use of these tools requires a sophisticated approach (Grady 1998; Morse & Richards, 2002). Historically the interview as a research tool is a relatively new phenomena. Many have argued that particular forms of inquiry, questioning, and answering have been around as long as parental authority has. Such questions as “why are you late?” “where have you been?” and “have you finished your homework?” provide a small litany of such investigations. 115 The widespread use of interviews where individuals approach complete strangers and ask ever increasing intrusive questions surrounding personal preferences, workplace practices, or specific perceptions of specific cultures or organizations has a compressed history, perhaps only in the last century The emergence of the standardized survey interview can be traced directly to the post World War II era. In its recent history some have talked of the interview as a method rooted deeply in American life. David Silverman (1997) has suggested that the pervasiveness of the interview, the frequency, and rate at which it imposes on our lives have prompted some to coin the term “interview society.” Interviews have been extended to professional practice as well, creating a growing cottage industry. In this investigation, a particular form of this method, the interview was employed. A hybrid approach using standardized open-ended interview questions along with informal conversational interview questions, provided the opportunity and flexibility in probing subjects’ responses in specific areas. This strategy assisted in allowing the subjects investigated to respond in their own words and to express their own personal perspectives surrounding these programs and their implementation. Fixed responses in executing these interviews were excluded based on the limited nature of such responses. Open-ended questions were developed in advance, piloted before the actual interview takes place. A pilot committee consisting of individuals familiar with the School-to-Work movement examined and field-tested these questions. Additional probes linked to the initial questions were also developed. During the interview, unplanned, unanticipated probes based on responses given, will also be used. 116 These interviews were recorded in long hand, coded to ensure confidentiality, and professionally transcribed. Site-based instructional leaders and central office administrators were queried using this technique. Instructional leaders were interviewed using the Instructional Leaders’ Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.) and central office administrators were interviewed using the Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.) (see Appendices A and B) Surveys Surveys, in theory, are to be responded to without help or interference from the researcher. Surveys set themselves apart from interviews acknowledging that they are a self-completed instrument. This instrument also has constraints in that it is created ahead of time long before it is administered and as a result, it is an instrument that is rigid in structure unlike the interview that can be amended in accordance with responses given. The development of interview protocols and surveys is directly related to the information sought via the research questions. These instruments were utilized to gain both quantitative and qualitative information from individuals as they explain organizations or systems. Interviews and surveys related to whole systems as School-to-Work programs can aid immensely in giving valued data to be collected and analyzed (Janesick, 2000). For this study interviews and surveys were designed to elicit information from instructional site-based leaders and central office administrators. Surveys developed for instructional site-based leaders solicited demographic information including, mostly quantitative in nature, the programs they are involved with (size, tenure and others), experience in education, teaching experience, administrative experience, professional 117 preparation, and other information deemed necessary in examining School-to-Work programs and the implementation process involved. Instructional leaders were administered the Survey of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.), created specifically for this investigation (see Appendix C). Ethical Concerns Ethical considerations have a paramount importance in any research endeavor (Zeni, 2001). Proper protection of subjects was instituted. Permission from local educational agencies and individuals was solicited. The purpose of the study and a promise of confidentiality was distributed to all participants via a cover letter and/or emailed and conveyed through an information sheet for non medical research from the University of Southern California and the principal researcher involved in the investigation. High levels of confidentiality were maintained. Appropriate protocol was utilized to successfully mask the identities of school districts, programs, and major participants in the study, in an effort to provide a research atmosphere where all involved felt confident in responding honestly to all queries. Respondents’ responses in interview and questionnaires were coded with the utilization of the Greek alphabet (Alpha I, II, Beta I, II…). Each district and site were assigned a single specific Greek alphabet character and the numerals I and II representing the Site Instructional Leader and Central Office Administrator respectively. Results of the investigation were made available to all participants. 118 Data Collection Data collection was comprised of interviews and surveys administered to site- based instructional leaders and central office administrators respectively. Additional surveys, were also considered, as dictated by questions that emerged. This collection solicited a wide variety of information from four School-to-Work programs. Data collection began in April 2007 and was completed in September 2007. Data Analysis Qualitative data was collected and organized into three major areas with a focus on the research questions posed in this investigation. 1. Responses of Site Instructional Leaders 2. Responses of Central Office Administrators 3. Survey responses from Site Instructional Leaders There are many options for organizing and reporting qualitative data according to Patton (2002). These include storytelling approaches (chronology, flash back), case study approaches (people, various settings) and analytical framework approaches (processes, issues, responses to specific interview questions). The research questions in this study indicate that a combination of approaches will best expedite the answering of the queries outlined in proceeding chapters. Combined with these qualitative approaches, emerging themes will also be discussed. Major themes will be paralleled with the appropriate research questions initiating this study. These emerging themes linked with the stated research questions will be the basis for the remaining chapter of the study. Combined with these qualitative approaches, demographic quantitative data will be collected, 119 organized, and analyzed using descriptive case study analysis with the goal of describing these specific service delivery model systems and the leadership profiles of those at those sites. The multi method approach used and the various instruments employed contributed to the effectiveness and utility of this investigation. Data collected from a wide variety of sources can provide for a triangulation of the information. 120 Chapter IV Research Findings The data analysis and findings of the study are reported in this chapter. Included in this chapter is a description of the sample that participated in this investigation, the instruments utilized, and the results garnered. Data uncovered included background information of instructional leaders, a description of specific S.T.W. programs, and a discussion of responses to the research questions posed. Description of the Sample The present study examined School to Work programs in urban districts within the state of California, viewed from the perspective of leadership intimately involved in these programs. Applying a collaborative approach utilizing California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS), the Statistical Abstract of the United States and the population status criteria outlined by the U.S. Central Bureau, prospective districts were selected. Once randomized through the application of a random number table, districts were then contacted by e-mail using directory information provided by the prospective districts' websites. Initial correspondence provided the University’s IRB approval and information letter and an invitation to participate in the study. Central office administrator and site instructional leaders were solicited to participate in the study, which consisted of separate interview protocols for each central office administrator and site instructional leader involved in School to Work programs. In addition, site instructional leaders were also invited to complete a survey of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.). 121 Instruments Utilized Central office administrators were administered the Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.), which was previously piloted and revised by a group of individuals familiar with school to work programs in urban districts in California. Site Instructional Leaders were administered the Instructional Leaders Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.). These site instructional leaders were also administered a survey, which solicited demographic information regarding their respective sites. These instruments were also piloted and revised by individuals familiar with School to Work programs in urban districts in California. Beginning in April of 2007 and ending in September 2007, four urban districts participated in the study with four central office administrators and three site instructional leaders composing the cohorts. The data collected was organized into three major areas with an attempt to uncover major themes and to provide cogent responses to the research questions posed. 1. Responses of Site Instructional Leaders 2. Responses of Central Office Administrators 3. Survey Responses from Site Instructional Leaders Responses of Site Instructional Leaders The responses of site instructional leaders retrieved from the telephonic responses in the administration of the Instructional Leaders’ Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.) can be found in Appendix A coupled with an individual item analysis of the collective responses framed around individual questions. 122 Responses of Central Office Administrators The responses of central office participants’ responses through the administration of the Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.) are also included in Appendix B along with an individual item analysis. Survey Responses from Site Instructional Leaders The surveys administered to instructional leaders examined the backgrounds of those involved in instructional leadership roles in STW programs. The administration of this instrument was an effort to provide a glimpse into the demographic profiles of those individuals and the programs they were engaged in. Table 3 provides a graphic representation of the information collected from the Survey of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.) found in Appendix C. Profiles of Site Instructional Leaders The survey of instructional leaders examined gender, experience within and outside of the educational environment. Other information solicited included educational background, program description, students served, and plant configuration. Educational attainment. All of three respondents showed at minimum had at least a Bachelor’s level education attainment level with all showing undergraduate preparation that revolved around trade specialization. Two had a B.A. in Industrial Education, often the desired entry-level education qualifier for teaching the industrial arts curriculum at the secondary or junior college level. Despite this there are some innovative programs using non-degreed candidates in entry level teaching positions and a supported district approach in acquiring a credential. Many districts prefer a credentialed person who also has 123 acquired a four-year degree. Alpha I in addition to a B.A. in Industrial Education he also acquired an M.A. in School Administration, and also was conferred as a credentialed school administrator. He also had an additional certificate in School Business Management. Beta II reported that he had initiated involvement in a Masters of Business Administration program. Table 3: Profiles of Site Instructional Leaders Characteristic Alpha I Beta I Delta I Gamma I Sex Male Male Male No Site Participation Experience in Education (Years): Paraprofessional Teacher Counselor Administrator Administrator in School to Work Program 0 3 0 21 4-5 0 5 0 2 0 19 0 5 No Site Participation Experience Outside of Education: Career Field Position Held Number of Years Law Enforcement 15 Manufacturing/ Management 22 Commercial Construction (Family Business) 25 No Site Participation Educational Background: B.A. Industrial Ed. M.A. School Administration Cert: School Business Mgmt. B.S. Engineering M.B.A. Coursework B.A. Industrial Ed. No Site Participation Work experience. The respondents all showed extensive experience with long tenures in different positions. The positions spanned a wide range from law enforcement to manufacturing, management, and construction. It appeared that all of them had extensive former rich careers before entering education. Upon entering education they held a number of positions including being a teacher and counselor with 28 years and 24 124 years respectively, two had extensive time either as counselor teacher or both. Beta II who had the least time as an educator, seven years, brought 22 years as a manufacturing floor/ plant manager with a large number of skills gathered working in that capacity. Gender. All three respondents were self-identified as males. Program Description The program description data was also uncovered from the administering of the Survey Of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.) which can be located in Appendix C. The response data is outlined in Table 4. The Career Academy is well documented in California as a champion and stronghold in the use of this model. It was the model of choice with all three programs examined choosing this model. Collectively these three programs served 1490 students with a mean of 496.6. Collectively these 1490 students who were served by a faculty of 80, showed a mean of 26.6 teachers per site. Compounding all the sites showed a mean faculty to student ratio of 18.6/1. Individually Alpha had a 26.1/1 student to teacher ratio, Beta had a 15.3/1 student to faculty ratio, and Delta had an16.3/1 student to faculty ratio. Following the Career Academy Model, each had a different career focus (Global Technology, Arts, Multimedia & Entertainment, and Biotechnology). Student Population All three Career Academies in urban districts in California examined the focus of this study served a large diverse student population census. There were stratified by population who spoke a first language other than English showing Alpha with 38% (172), 125 Table 4: Program Description Program Characteristics Alpha Beta Delta Gamma Size of Program: Students Faculty 575 22 490 32 425 26 No Site Participation Types of Academies Global Technology Academy Arts, Multimedia, & Entertainment Biotechnology No Site Participation Population Served: % of Student Population Who Speak a First Language Other Than English 30 18 15 No Site Participation % of Student Population That Meet Diverse Criteria (Students Other Than Anglo) 80 22 60 No Site Participation % of Student Population Who Meet Any One of the Federal Handicapping Conditions 510 8 No Site Participation Plant Configuration: a. Housed Within a Traditional School Site b. Physical Plant Specifically Created for the Program c. Use of Alternative Sites Yes No No Yes No No Yes No Site Participation Other Specifications Numerous Academies Throughout District Part of District Wide High School Reform Originally Housed School Within School Other Specifications Numerous Academies Throughout District Part of District Wide High School Reform Originally Housed School Within School Number of Students Served District Wide in STW Programs 10,000 15,000 4,500 No Data Available Beta 18% (88), and Delta 15% (63). When examining diverse student status (students other than Anglo) the data indicates Alpha 80% (460), Beta 22% (107), and Delta 60% (255). The data showing students who qualified for any one of thirteen Federal Handicapping Conditions indicated Alpha 5% (28), Beta 10% (49), and Delta 8% (34). 126 This reflects national data that shows approximately 10% of student population meeting at least one F.H.C. Examining district wide data of the districts researched in this study that each urban district served large numbers of student in STW Programs. The mean number of students served shows 9,833 students served in the three districts that shared enrollment data that were students served in STW Programs. In these individual districts the number served showed 15,000, 10,000, and 4,950 respectively. The instructional leaders came from a plethora of backgrounds inside and outside of education. Many of the respondents commented that this was a prime factor in them being hired in an instructional leadership role. Many central office administrators stated that outside of school experience was a factor, part of the substantial criteria for hiring of administrators in School to Work programs. Discussion of the Findings This section briefly summarizes the research findings and includes a corresponding discussion on the four research questions posed in this study. The research questions that guided this study were: 1. What role do instructional leaders and central office administrators play in the implementation of School to Work programs? 2. What barriers had to be overcome in the implementation process? 3. What skills, knowledge base, and practices of school leadership contribute to the implementation or non-implementation of School to Work programs? 4. What specific data is there that indicates and supports better outcomes for students enrolled in School to Work programs? 127 The questions selected are the foundation for the methodology utilized, the data collection undertaken, analysis and ultimately the discussion in this investigation’s concluding chapter. Research Question 1 1. What role do instructional leaders and central office administrators play in the implementation of School to Work programs? Finding 1: Implementation according to the responses from site instructional leaders and central office administrators leads to a major theme uncovered, that there are extensive barriers to overcome in the implementation of such programs. Many of these barriers include but are not limited to legislative mandates at the state and federal level including No Child Left Behind, A.Y.P./A.P.I. scores, a focus on A-G requirements and the supposition that STW programs are not fully understood. While some site instructional leaders believe they have a role in the implementation process the scope and depth of these barriers indicates that implementation resides best in the hands of central office administrators. Many of the challenges that they face at the district level are best responded to by central office staff who have a thorough knowledge of the philosophical origins of vocational education, CTE, and STW programs. The questions asked often reflect the understanding that STW programs are vocationally based and not related to academic achievement. Many urban districts are placed in a position to defend program implementation based on its utility to increase academic achievement, narrow the achievement gap of diverse learners, and increase the capacity for post secondary 128 opportunities for students in urban areas. It is essential that district staff have the ability to, in meaningful ways, explain the integrated systems approach in linking academic learning with technical knowledge, school based learning with work based learning, matching skill base of students exiting the secondary setting with local workforce needs, providing paths as students move from secondary school onto postsecondary opportunities. It is equally important that they make real the connection between school and the world of work, two entities that have a long history of being disjointed. Despite the idea that this is a large task and that it needs to be taken on by central office staff many of these central office administrators place a great deal of trust in principals in these programs in being able to address the questions of individuals in the community, in government, and in private industry. The expectation on the part of central office staff is that principals, site instructional leaders, be well versed in the teaching and learning process surrounding academic and technical subject matter. In interviews, central office staff through their responses indicated they had a thorough knowledge regarding these issues. Their responses indicated how important it was to have the capacity in sanitizing misunderstandings and misinformation. This is essential in winning over the important collaborators, community members, parents, and industry leaders. The expansion and sustainability of these programs particularly career academies shows that while these arguments have been waged for a long time. Based on current funding and acceptability there is a renewed interest in these types of programs and the 129 arguments in favor of them are contributing to convincing constituents the importance of these programs. Research Question 2 2. What barriers had to be overcome in the implementation process? Finding 2: Even for these districts that are engaged in the offering of STW programs it was still necessary to overcome some of the barriers delineated in Finding 1. Many of the barriers presented are a reflection of some of the most pertinent questions being asked in matters surrounding school. These include what is the purpose of school? Based on the response to that query a number of other questions are also raised. Why do schools need to change and in what way do they need to change? The effectiveness of vocational education, STW, and CTE is a discussion that has been framed for two and one half centuries. Beginning with the colonial period through the passage of the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1870, the Smith-Hughes Act, of 1917, The School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994, and in present day the discussions surrounding the pros and cons of these programs are still active. Central office staff took deliberate measures to solicit input, including employer and industry needs, from the community and those on advisory boards before embarking in this process. Challenges that existed, questioned in many instances whether STW programs were vocational education programs revisited through a different lens or part of a systematic way of doing things differently, appeared to be the foremost in terms of barriers to implementation of School to Work programs. Urban areas, because of the abundant challenges they face are often looking for solutions that can create better 130 outcomes for students. There has always been in recent years a focus on outcomes in the academic literature that show low graduation rates and serious achievement gaps between African Americans, Hispanics, and their Anglo counterparts. Considerable pressure has been placed on urban districts to look for solutions surrounding standards driven measures. The misunderstanding of the philosophical foundations of STW programs has played a role in creating additional barriers. Successful implementers do not ignore the issues that focus on the philosophical arguments for or against vocational education, STW, or CTE. They address them directly providing program effectiveness demonstrated by the more positive outcomes that students experience including the lowering dropout rate, increasing attendance and engagement and opening the path for more positive post-secondary outcome. Other barriers cited by respondents included the physical and fiscal capacity to implement such programs. Research Question 3 3. What skills, knowledge base, and practices of school leadership contribute to the implementation or non-implementation of School to Work programs? Finding 3: The responses from the interview protocols administered to instructional leaders and to central office administrators specifically addressed this core question. Major themes that emerged that addressed this question specifically included 1) the importance of site instructional leaders and their skill base. 2) the importance of site leaders experience outside of education, and 3) teaching was an underlying component of site instructional leaders background in education 131 There was an expectation on the part of central office administrators that the recognition of the importance of site leadership was necessary. The central office administrators who in many ways orchestrated program implementation at the district level were well versed in the long-standing debates that have existed when vocational education, STW, or CTE matters are discussed. Their extensive atypical experience in adult education, K-12 teaching, with students at risk, as counselor, program manager in federally funded programs and leadership in a Fortune 500 Company, suggest that they collectively, and individually brought a great combination of skills in directing these types of programs. It became clear that much of their philosophical orientations that they embraced were as a matter of practice passed onto the site instructional leaders. The articulated visions by central office staff were frequently projected in the interview and clearly articulated by the site leaders. Although front line teaching and paraprofessionals were not included in this study, the researcher believes that these same philosophical orientations could be and would be articulated by these staff members The academic literature is abundant in recognizing that site instructional leaders are key in having the capacity to lead schools in seeking out more positive outcomes for students. There are numerous accounts in the literature that site leaders may be the sole entity responsible for change in schools. This unique program option requires a unique set of skills. The role of principals in the traditional historical context points to them as middle level managers primarily engaged in administrative/managerial tasks of the school. Central office staff respondents reiterated the antithesis that there was a need for principals to be versed in the teaching and learning process. 132 All of the respondents were gregarious and passionate about their mission of expanding STW/CTE programs. The commitment to the kids they served was repeatedly addressed. With experience within education and different roles embraced, these site instructional leaders had extensive experience in “doing”. Many of the descriptors used in the review of literature when exploring vocational education, STW, and CTE recognizes and talks extensively of this concept of hands-on learning, learning by doing, learning a living, project based learning, contextual learning, and doing the learning where the work takes place (workplace learning), and merging head, heart, and hand provides and justifies the need for leaders with real life experience within and outside of education The respondents made it clear that they had specific skill sets in their trades but also soft skills, capacity to collaborate with a number of different constituents, educators, students, parents, elected officials, and industry leaders was a skill set that was essential in establishing, maintaining, and expanding these programs. It was clear from the interview responses that there was an incessant mandate that site leaders have extensive experience outside the field of education working in various industries The primary focus of STW programs in better preparing students for the world of work provides evidence that instructional leaders be knowledgeable about life after and outside of school. Central office administrators also recounted how important it was to have instructional leaders with teaching as an underlying component of their backgrounds in education. Individuals passionate about teaching and learning in a leadership role can have a lasting impact on students and staff at all schools not just in STW programs. 133 Research Question 4 4. What specific data is there that indicates and supports better outcomes for students enrolled in School to Work programs? Finding 4: There are a large number of positive outcomes outlined in various studies on the international, national, and statewide level. Many of the negative outcomes experienced by students particularly in our urban school districts including academic achievement deficits, the achievement gap, high dropout rates, and lack of student engagement appear to be positively impacted by the vocational education, STW, and CTE movements. Additional positive post-secondary outcomes are enumerated. There are a number of studies that provide a synthesis of research on the international, national, and statewide scale. Bishop & Mare (2004) conducting a study of industrialized 19 countries indicates that an increase in the number of students enrolled in CTE programs is correlated with an increase in graduation rates and in the percentage of students age 15-19, enrolled in school. Keating, Medrich, Volkoff, & Perry (2002) examining nine countries in three major geographic areas Europe, East Asia, and the Americas found success for participants in vocational education and training programs in a number of different areas. This study also examined the success of these programs and the impact they had on various school programs. Stokes & Wyn (2007) in their investigation of VET System in Australia cite that policymakers and schools regard VET as an important way to retain students in school programs and to provide positive pathways between education and employment. A national longitudinal study by Plank (2001) showed that taking a combination of 134 academic and CTE courses had a positive effect on high school graduate rates. Examining data from the new 1997 national Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY, 1997), Stone and Aliago (2007), which examined this large cohort that was a nationally representative sample of approximate 9,000 youth twelve to sixteen as of December 31, 1996 found high participation rates in CTE coursework. CTE continues to remain a large part of the high school experience. One third of this cohort were career major participants at some point in their high school career. At the state level there is noted widespread participation in vocational education, STW, or CTE programs. Reller (1984, 1985) showed positive outcomes for students enrolled in career academies. Academy students routinely perform better than non- academy students and also have more positive post-secondary outcomes in earnings and post-secondary school success. Orr, Bailey, Hughes, Kienzl, and Karp (2007) indicate that the spread of the Career Academy Model in the last decade is based on educators’ and policymakers’ belief that it contributes to positively impacting academic achievement and facilitating student transitions to college and careers. Although there has been much antidotal acknowledgement of better outcomes for students in STW programs, recent research provides evidence that there are in fact better outcomes for individuals involved in these programs. The 2006 Longitudinal Study Technical Report authored by Douglas E. Mitchell of the School Improvement Research Group at the University of California, Riverside, shows that students involved in regional occupational centers and programs, a key program for students enrolled in STW programs, shows significantly better outcomes when compared with cohorts not involved 135 with such programs. Another report, a profile of the California Partnership Academies, authored in 2007 by ConnectEd, (The California Center for College and Career) a component of the Career Academy Support Network at the University of California, Berkley, shows similar positive outcomes for students enrolled in STW programs. A press release from the California Department of Education, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, points out that many partnership academies are succeeding on several important fronts including California student passage rates are increasing on the California exit exam. More students completing A-G requirements of the University of California and California State University system and a corresponding higher proportion of seniors earning a high school diploma on time. Respondents from both the cadre of site instructional leaders and central office staff indicated the recent release of research data that supports better outcomes for students enrolled in STW programs. Reports generated at the state level and at private universities in recent years show clear evidence that students involved in STW programs experienced better outcomes. Some of the outcomes outlined in these research reports include more student engagement, increased graduation rates, higher passage rates on the California exit exam, and more involvement in post secondary options. The focus of the California Department of Education (CDE) in career and technical education has fostered a climate in the state where opportunities and funding for such programs have expanded and will expand in the future. 136 Chapter V Discussion Overview In the previous chapters an overview of this study and a literature review were presented followed by a discussion of the methodology utilized and a description of the findings. This chapter briefly reviews the purpose of the study, reports the major findings from Chapter IV, and then establishes relevant links to the literature. This chapter also examines the major themes that emerged and investigates topics for further study in this area. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to investigate School to Work programs that subscribe to tenets as expressed in the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (STWOA, 1994) in an attempt to better understand the implementation process. Those in leadership positions at School to Work programs, instructional leaders and central office administrators at a number of randomly selected programs in urban center throughout the state of California participated in this study. The litany of the need for change in our secondary schools is well documented in the academic literature. The call for change in our schools has come from government, industry, media, policy makers, teachers, parents, and most importantly, students. The STWOA, 1994 outlines a system to provide better outcomes for those exiting our secondary institutions. 137 Interview instruments were developed to specifically look at the role of site instructional leaders and central office administrators in the implementation process of School to Work programs. The overarching purpose of examining qualitative and quantitative case study analysis of data was to deepen the understanding of the implementation process and provide profiles of selected programs. Qualitative data was analyzed by the researcher with an understanding of the pertinent issues uncovered in the review of literature. These issues include change in school: a historical perspective, the purpose of school, a changing world, a changing work place, a history of vocational education in America, the role of leadership in the change process, passage of this legislation, and essential components of school to work systems. Analysis of this data also brought to light major emerging themes that arose as a result of this investigation. Major Themes The need for qualitative approaches can be summed up that this type of data collection and analysis allows individuals involved in specific settings to provide a conduit as that information is collected. The process allows for collecting data through interviews and surveys, in essence what people said, making sense of it and examining major themes or patterns as they emerge and integrating what different people have said about these systems or processes involved (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Marshall & Rossman, 2006; Moorse & Richards, 2007). 138 There were extensive interviews and surveys administered to site instructional leaders and interviews carried out with central office staff involved in School to Work programs in urban districts in California. The following are the major themes that emerged as this data was collected and analyzed. This analysis was reflective of the cogent topics addressed in the review of literature and framed within the context of individual item analysis conducted for each set of interview responses. These cogent topics included the rationale for this legislation. There was a persistent divide between the world of school and that of work. The skills students were exiting our schools with were far different than the skills that the workplace demanded. Vocational education and academic education were posed as rivals in an either or dilemma. This called for integration of systems approach where there could be a merger between school and work, workplace demands for specific skill sets, and secondary school preparation. The vehicle for this would be the forging of academic and vocational content areas. These themes included the importance of site instructional leaders in the implementation of School-to work programs, site instructional leaders’ extensive experience outside of education with evidence of trade specific expertise, that teaching was an underlying component of site leaders’ background and collaboration was a needed skill for site leaders. Importance of Site Instructional Leaders The importance of instructional leaders emerged as a major theme as the responses of both site instructional leaders and central office staff were analyzed. The broad focus of these individual’s importance is clearly linked to the purpose of this study, 139 the implementation of School -to -Work programs, and the role leadership plays in the process. These site administrators are considered an integral part of this process. The implementation of new programs and the introduction of a new order of carrying out an organization’s mission in any field require leaders who have a unique set of skills. These skills include the capacity to comprehend the philosophical orientation behind the change initiative, the knowledge base, and the ability to put theory into practice. The role of site leaders as instructional leaders is essential, particularly when the organization is immersed in the change process. The academic literature provides a strong compelling argument that the success of school change rests on the shoulders of those who recognize and assume the instructional leadership role based in programs examining and creating more positive outcomes for students. These individuals tasked with site leadership are responsible not just for the administrative managerial role found from a longstanding historical perspective but must also take a lead in providing instructional leadership. Involvement in any change initiative in all organizations not just the school setting requires this leadership component. They must have a thorough knowledge of the philosophical foundations of a this initiative, experience in the teaching and learning process, the capacity to be flexible, to be collaborative and to communicate with a wide variety of individuals on a number of different levels, within the public and private sector and the community at large. The interviews with both site leaders and central office administrators indicated the need to see the large picture, looking at the workforce needs of private industry, and to provide a integrated curriculum that could have students exiting the secondary schools 140 with the skills that are needed. These site instructional leaders need to be well versed in theory and philosophical orientation critical to various academic approaches and providing the path of coupling theory and practice. This was an important factor in leading sites in the mission of improving post secondary outcomes for students. While not all of the site instructional leaders could articulate their role in this process, they did all see it as important. An examination of responses from central office administrators found them aligned congruently with the responses of site instructional leaders when queried about the selection criteria for site leaders and the skills, knowledge base, and practices that contributes to program implementation. Many of the central office responses added impetus to the importance of these individuals and the enterprise they are engaged in. Importance of Site Leaders’ Experience Outside of Education Specific to this policy implementation of linking the entities of school and work requires individuals who have developed skills in both sectors. All of the site instructional leaders had technical skills in their respective areas of trade expertise and other experiences in the private sector. The implementation of School-to-Work programs, because of the need to collaborate with all stakeholders including industry and business in the private sector, along with integrating school and work requires individuals to be able to navigate competently in both sectors. Complimenting this experience all of the respondents had a varied experiential base within education. Again the need to integrate the needs of industry with the skills of students exiting our secondary schools one of the 141 rationales of program implementation relies strongly on site leaders’ background in the areas of both school and work. An abundance of technical subject matter knowledge was an underlying thread weaved throughout the experience base of all the instructional leaders interviewed and surveyed. They brought experience both in soft skills (working with people) to hard skills (technical knowledge). These are the same skills that are outlined in the Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS). The outlined skills from this report clearly identify what skills our students should exit our secondary schools with. Site leaders’ capacity to model these hard and soft skill sets on a daily basis with students, teachers, parents, paraprofessionals, industry leaders, government leaders, and support staff would contribute significantly to gaining the support from the many stakeholders in the program implementation and sustainability process. The instructional leaders’ cohort of responses in both the interview and the survey responses demonstrated that this range of experience was diverse in substance, tenure, and types of different experiences. All had demonstrated leadership in government and/or private industry sectors and the experience was grounded in duration and diverse experiences coupled with experience in the school setting. Problem solving was frequently mentioned as a basis for hiring criteria for site based instructional leaders, almost to the extent that as if this skill only existed in the purview of entities outside of education systems. Repeatedly addressed in the review of the academic literature was that STW programs are focused in an integration of systems approach on bridging the gap between a number of divergent systems, the world of school and the world of work, academic and technical subject 142 matter, social skills and technical skills. The skills demonstrated to be mastered in industry or government are skills considered highly desirable in the selection of site instructional leaders for this type of program implementation. While some respondents’ experience base were more varied or responses indicated a deeper understanding of STW programs all individuals brought skill sets from outside the educational setting that were considered valuable, championed, and welcomed. Teaching Was an Underlying Component of Respondents’ Background in Education It has been said that to learn a new skill or a new of way of doing things is to learn once. The depth of experience required in teaching in a particular field or a specific skill indicates that you learn more than once, perhaps twice or more. The focus of these instructional leaders demonstrated excellence in their particular trade has the capacity to benefit students and staff. Equally important when matching exiting students’ skill set in both the soft and technical context, site instructional leaders from their industry and trade backgrounds can make the connection between what school offers and what industry needs. Coupling that with a well-grounded pedagogy presents an argument for how powerful, on a synergetic level when these skill sets are combined. These skill sets according to the responses from the instruction leaders also contributed to the selection criteria process for teachers and support staff. While all had elaborated on their technical know how and experience outside of education, it was obvious that all were equally attracted to teaching subject matter, particularly in the technical field that they demonstrated expertise in. The integration of 143 vocational subject matter in unison with academic coursework must be an issue that not only can be philosophically justified, but made part of the foundation of these programs. An important facet in leading a site in a new way of teaching and learning is for site leaders to have hands on experience in that process. It may be redundant that instructional leadership implies that one be highly skilled in the teaching and learning process. These types of programs take the depth of understanding in these matters to a higher level where the integration of technical and academic subject matter create a new paradigm in schooling young people. Principals as instructional leaders can easily muster the trust and confidence of individuals based on the experience that they have taught and taught well in the trenches. Central office personnel voiced a similar set of responses: That a thorough understanding and superior skills in teaching was a requisite for individuals chosen as site instructional leaders in School-to-Work programs. Collaboration Is a Requisite Skill for a Site Leader The rationale for STW Programs is clear in calling for this integration of systems approach. There is a need to link the skills students’ possess when they exist secondary schools juxtaposed to the skills business and industry demands, and lastly merging vocational and academic coursework. The administration of the Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.) yielded responses that demonstrated the ability to collaborate with individuals in business, industry, parents, and community was an important skill needed for implementation of those programs. If one is to link school and work they must be able to show that they can 144 merge the two through connecting activities including internships, externships, job shadowing, and other endeavors that bridge the gaps between these two enterprises. There is the need for the individuals to feel comfortable in both worlds of school and work highlighting the previous emerging theme where selection was based on experience within and outride of education. When central office staff were questioned regarding “criteria that should be utilized in selecting site-base instructional leaders for a STW program” it was reiterated that the capacity for collaboration was key. One respondent eloquently used the word choreographer in describing himself in the role of a site instructional leader. When site instructional leaders were administered their respective interview protocol they also were adamant that collaboration was an essential strand initially the implementation process and in carrying out the mission of the program. Perhaps one of the first steps in creating viable STW programs is determining industry skill needs and then building a program that meets those needs. Individuals that are successful in matching the needed skills of industry with the skill base of those existing schools must be able to honestly and completely solicit accurate information from the business and industry community. Lastly the integration of academic and vocational subject matter calls on individuals to be able to make the collaborative connection between the two. The academic skill of solving slope theory equations in isolation is often an exercise void in meaning. When combined with the application of slope theory utilized in building of a staircase is not seen as an irrelevant skill but one with broad contextual meaning. Collaboration with those in industry and those who teach academic skills in isolation is necessary in all effective STW programs. 145 Recommendations for Future Research The School to Work movement has a long history in terms of the legislation and the philosophical orientations behind its passage. The notions that STW is still viewed as a concept with cynicism and skepticism from within the ranks of educational systems points in the direction that further research should be done in this area. Some of those investigations could include a meta-analysis of the existing literature in this area or more in depth longitudinal studies of students exiting these programs. Examining long-term longitudinal studies may also contribute to the research base of life-long positive outcomes for participants in these programs. There also is a dearth of research examining correlations between participation in STW or CTE and performance on standards based tests. Funding sources often appear to be mired in red tape and uneven distribution of resources. Research that could provide funding maps would also contribute to the expansion of these programs. The focus of these investigations should remain on the students whose needs are most abundant, those in our urban areas, kids of color, those who speak a first language other than English, and those with special needs. Summary Change is difficult in any organization and schools are no different. Each and every change initiative has proponents and other individuals who present barriers in implementation. There is a long protracted involvement with matters surrounding vocational education. Beginning with apprenticeships during the colonial period which were promoted in familiar to present day implementation internationally, nationally, and 146 on the local level of Career and Technical Education Programs there are still posed on either side of the arguments individuals for or against these initiatives. Much of the discussion supporting vocational education, School to work, and present day CTE enactment has been focused on national economic interests, preparing a more informed competent workforce, and better life-long outcomes for young people. These same arguments for this type of program implementation have existed for as long as America has been involved with this enterprise legislation beginning with passage of the Smith-Hughes Bills of 1917 progressing to the STWOA of 1994 and other legislative enactments. The purpose of this study was to look at STW Programs in urban school districts in California from the perspective of people who lead at individual school sites and the district level. Arguments that were offered in the progression to the passage of the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 were similar to others that historically had been framed. Additional arguments in favor of this legislative enactment and program implementation included increased dropout rates, lack of student engagement, particularly in urban areas, academic achievement deficits, and achievement gaps between Anglo students and those from diverse backgrounds. Other arguments centers on students being ill prepared for the world that awaits them including post-secondary training and ultimately work. Arguments against implementation cited vocational programs as non0academic and seen as a moral corrective for children of color, maladjusted, urban poor, and incarcerated youth. This selected focus in specific groups was seen as a bigoted and pejorative view of vocational education. 147 The need for change in school has been a constant companion for as long as schooling has existed in America. The outcomes of our students in our urban areas have placed a focus on the abundant needs in these schools and communities. High dropout rates, poor student achievement, disparities between Anglo students and their Hispanic and African American counterparts, and malignant post secondary outcomes have exacerbated the need for change. The STWOA of 1994 provides some answers for those demanding change. These demands for change have come from government, media, policy makers, parents, teachers, and students. This study has been an attempt to examine site instructional leaders and central office administrators with the hope of finding answers to the hows and whys of individuals support implementation of these programs. Through interviews and surveys administered to site instructional leaders and central office staff involved in school to work programs their implementation and barriers faced significant information and insight was acquired. The service delivery system of choice was the Career Academy Model. Program descriptions showed that these small learning communities focused on specific career themes. There was an abundant experiential base for those who were site leaders. They had demonstrated competence in their respective trade field. These site instruction leaders also had extensive teaching backgrounds and their responses indicated a pronounced focus on teaching and learning. All, in their responses, indicated a commitment to the programs and the students that were served. Successful site instructional leaders in STW programs had to have the capacity to articulate and collaborate with a number of different individuals in industry government, and the community at large. 148 There are numerous positive outcomes for students who take part in these programs. Increases in academic interest, performance, and engagement are outlined. Additionally there is an indication that participation in these programs decreases the drop out rate and increases attendance. Participants also experience more positive post secondary outcomes as earnings and involvement in postsecondary schools has also been demonstrated. STW and CTE have gained acceptability in what they offer to students, employers, and their communities. It appears that based on those assumptions these programs will continue to expand. The purpose of this study was to investigate School-to-Work programs in an attempt to better understand the implementation process. They study was framed around a leadership perspective. Reflecting on this study, its findings, and the themes that emerged additional questions surfaced that provide additional insight surrounding this study. These questions include: What do we know, where have we been, where are we, and where are we headed? I. What do we know? It is evident that our schools need to change. Many students who exit our secondary schools are unprepared for life after high school. Those that are headed to four- year universities often spend a considerable amount of time in remedial classes at those universities. Others, who do not go off to college, find themselves seeking out minimum wage jobs along with having periodic bouts of unemployment. Many of the students in our urban centers, who are children of color and/or speak a first language other than English along with students with special needs, have a protuberant roadblock in the 149 highway of life, where they have failed to meet the requirements of acquiring a high school diploma. Some find themselves in this position after attending four years in high school. Some don’t make it that far, they dropout well before their senior year in high school. They don’t raise their hands and tell teachers that the curriculum is meaningless or that school is boring. Instead they show their disdain by the precipitous movements of their lower extremities as they leave the schoolhouse door and it closes behind them. The dropout rate in our urban centers hovers at 30%. When it comes to international academic competition we are well behind the eight ball. Despite the fact that we lead the world in Gross Domestic Production (G.D.P.) per capita and spend on the average more than 23% more than the second place competitor, France, in per pupil pending, academically we fall behind a number of G-8 countries in the areas of math and science. The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (O.E.C.D.) in 2006 pointed to a lack of ambition on the part of youth in many O.E.C.D. countries contrasted with the emerging instilment of work ethic values, parental push, and a focus on ambition in other countries. Student receptivity to these issues in China and India is also noted and this contributes to these countries’ capacity to compete internationally. The United States for the first half of the 20 century and for a th number of decades in the second half led the world across a number of different competitive academic measures. The United States in recent years has fallen behind many other countries in one of these rubrics, the percent of the population who have met the requirements of acquiring a high school diploma. (O.E.C.D., 2006) 150 We also know that schools must change based on the changing world and workplace. In many ways the world has changed but our schools have not. There is a growing internationalization and globalization of markets that have created a flattening of the world’s playing field. Friedman demonstrates in his tome The World is Flat, time and time again that there is no longer a trade off between high skills or low wages. The competitive workforce in other countries can offer both high skills and low wages placing them in a role of competing with American workers across a number of different industries. The playing field of economic competition is not limited to countries in the Western world but has surged to 6 billion people around the world. Schools must also change based on the notion that the information explosion has had a profound effect on the world. Between 1991 and 1996 the number of Internet users soared from 600,000 to 40 million. One Internet search engine, Goggle, went from 150 million searchers a day to one billion in a day. Roberts who looked at data from the U.S. Census Bureau found that 97 million Americans received their news from the Internet and that an equal number have shopped for goods and services. While many institutions of higher learning use distance learning or a highbred merging the Internet and face to face learning our high schools in many ways still look the same and operate as they did at the turn of the century. Correspondingly the workplace has also changed with a more diverse workforce and a focus on information as a desired commodity and currency exchanged in these new thinking and information rich workplace organizations. Accompanying this change in the workplace is the expectation that employees become lifelong learners. Are we 151 encouraging lifelong learning? Are we altering practices that will prepare students for lifelong learning? Are we utilizing this information explosion in new ways of teaching and learning? We also know that there is consistent and persistent divide between the world of school and the world of work. Lynn Olson who wrote the School to Work Revolution, said these two systems, school and work, act as if the other did not exist. Educators view business with suspicion and envy and employers place little faith in the schools mission or accomplishments. A lot of time, effort, and fiscal expenditure are invested in school. We school over 50 million students. In some states education makes up 50% of a state’s allocated budget, and according to the Broad Foundation, some district spending approaches the expenditure of Fortune 500 companies. The disconnect becomes very apparent when you look at the time and number of years a student spends in elementary and secondary schools. With life expectancy approaching 80, life after high school would span 50+ years. Work and its time consumption of 2,000 hours a year that extends for decades finds that its importance is underestimated and overshadowed by the K-12 experience. Somehow this “real world” is delayed or postponed while students spend approximately 18 years in school awaiting its arrival. There is little or no parity or equity with the two. Students often phrase the out of school years as the “real world”. Ironically respondents, site leaders and central office personnel who participated in the study, talked about life outside of school and work experience in industry as the real world also. Is the implication that would we do in school is “fantasy,” part of the “make-up world” or the “unreal world”? How many 152 students have that pejorative view passed on to them either explicitly or implicitly in elementary, secondary, and college classrooms. We also know that the skills student exit secondary schools with are not the skills industry requires. Schools therefore do not provide the product that business and industry is in need of. The next question that arises is where have we been in regards to schooling in America? II. Where have we been? We have been entrenched in schooling for almost three centuries in America. As the purposes of school have changed, linked to the social, political, and economic forces the approach to schooling has also been altered. When schools were seen as vehicles for disseminating of religious thought there were no mandatory attendance laws. However, when the purpose of school was seen as an opportunity to Americanize immigrants these types of mandatory attendance laws were enacted. As the purposes of school continued to change and transitioned to preparing a workforce or providing workers for wartime, vocational education once reserved as a family endeavor where apprentices learned from their fathers or grandfathers, became part of mainstream educational practice. Arguments for vocational education cited that it was needed as a matter of world economic competition while those against responded that it was instituted for those less intellectually capable and a means for educationally tracking these populations. Although there have been millions of dollars apportioned for vocational education through various pieces of legislation starting with the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 there were, and still are individuals still posturing for and against vocational education. 153 The most wide reaching legislation, sanctioned by both the Departments of Labor and Education, the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 set the stage in merging legislatively the worlds of school and work, attempting to have schools better prepare students leaving high school and linking vocational course work with academic course work. The progression from vocational education in the larger part of the 20 Century to th School- to -Work movement in the 1990’s has now been christened in the last ten years, a term with more universal receptivity, Career and Technical Education. The question now posed is where are we now? III. Where are we now? The need for reform based on student outcomes including drop out rates, poor academic performance, and a difficult transition to adult life for many has provided the foundation for the spread of small learning communities and secondary schools created around broad career themes. International academic competition, internationalization of markets, the information explosion, and the changing workplace provided additional ammunition for those seeking change in our schools. Coincidentally, these same factors that provided the impetus for school reform in the last decade including the internationalization /globalization of markets, dire forecasts of America’s lagging in international competition and the information explosion were also the same arguments used for the spread of vocational education, the School to Work movement, and presently the infusion of Career and Technical Education programs in schools. 154 The practice of combining school-based learning (where contextual subject matter is taught in the school setting) with work-based learning (where applied subject matter is taught where it is used, the work setting) has help create a loosely framed merging of school and work. Connecting activities, internships, externships, job shadowing and other shared activities between school and the business community have also made more real the interdependence of the two. With these two different worlds cooperating together in these shared activities it has also helped make clearer the connection between the skills that students have versus the skills that business and industry needs. America’s schools at the secondary level have incorporated a number of small learning communities with career themes that provide each small learning community with a focus on broad career themes. The infusion and funding of Career and Technical Education is well documented in our schools in recent years along with a parade of more positive student outcomes. These more positive outcomes associated with the emergence of these programs include higher G.P.A.s, a decrease in the dropout rate, more postsecondary school involvement, and better performance in post secondary settings of those that have participated in CTE coursework at the secondary level. Many of the studies that reflect these more positive outcomes indicate that the data is garnered not in just the United States but internationally from around the world. Fiscal expenditures in the field of Career and Technical Education have remained constant or have increased while spending in other areas has decreased. Undoubtedly this promulgation of these programs has fostered more of a focus on life after high school for students involved in aligned course taking. How many more students 155 do not participate in CTE programs and cannot benefit from its effects. How many of these same students see school as a holding place in the “fantasy make believe or unreal world” before one enters “the real world “outside of school. IV. Where are we going? While gazing whimsically into crystal balls often lacks a degree of accuracy, predictions of future developments based on an examination and reflection on the history of, the changing purposes of education in America, America’s push-pull relationship with vocational education, and results acquired in this study there is an opportunity for providing answers for what will be but also what could be. Career and Technical education will continue to grow in fiscal expenditures and the real numbers of students served will expand. More students will have a CTE focus added into their curriculums as new schools are built that subscribe to the small learning community (S.L.C.) approach with each SLC having a career focus. Additional large schools that have been in existence will be broke into smaller units (SLCs) that will have the capacity to make the high school experience more personal. One might question which innovation is driving the other innovation. Does the small learning community movement come first and the career focus of these smaller schools come as an afterthought? Career focus has a broader appeal than school names based on birds reminiscent of reading groups or the colors of the rainbow. It sounds much better to come from the Center for Science and Engineering at Hamilton High School than “I am in the Bluebird School at Hamilton High.” By adding a token course or two in science does that 156 really change the school systemically? Does it change what the school does and how they do it? Structurally schools will look the same as they have looked for the last seven decades or at least since college preparation became the American High School’s mission. Students will continue to meander through the period segmented day whether in a traditional six period or alternative blocked schedule. These students will continue to take the long litany of proposed classes required for entrance into the coveted four-year universities. The transcripts for California high school students will still show the all- purpose recipe of course taking that meets the almighty A-G requirements. Most student transcripts will look the same as they did for other students in the last part of the 20 th century. The questions remain. Is this change initiative systemic? Will the divide between school and work widen or will it become narrower? Will these two systems be viewed by students as being part of an integrated whole? Will many of our students still view their high school years or even their college experience as a distant third cousin to the world of work. Will they continue to see that “the real world” is somehow not part of, or integrated into the years they spent in their academic preparation. What is the status of the forgotten half that Barton, Will, and others write extensively about who do not aspire or decide not to prolong life long learning after high school by attending a technical school, junior college, or four year college? Linda Lee, an editor of the New York Times, labels these students as the college have-nots. These students may have dropped out of school or graduated via an alternative exiting 157 document, the letter of recognition or certificate of completion for those with special needs or being part of the student population not meeting the credit requirements and acquiring the minimum Grade Point Average (G.P.A.) of 2.0. Is it possible that the one size fits all high school curriculum, that of college preparation leaves a number of students out of the equation, viewed as an anomaly, an odd bird, a substandard byproduct of the secondary school experience? As high school requirements raise the bar by requiring additional science and math course requirements those in the lower quartile may be left behind. Schooling may be the only enterprise that when the bar is raised the assumption is that student’s skills and achievement levels will rise correspondingly. Recent trends show that some California school districts are forging the A-G requirements of the California State University system and the University of California system with the minimal requirements for high school graduation including foreign language, higher-level math and science coursework. Higher standards can sow benefits for a number of students, but what will it do to the personal psyche and self-esteem of some, for whatever reason, do not measure up? This may not be specifically labeled a dropout problem but a case of some students being pushed out. Some may consider blasphemy the idea that high schools continue to warehouse students in extensive curriculum course undertaking. The arguments surrounding course relevancy of the 1960’s has been revisited by a number of educational theorists in the current academic literature. What utility is there for the students who are going on to four- year universities in the taking of advanced math classes in calculus or trigonometry in 158 high school when their interests are in pursuing the social sciences? Can there be meaning for those not progressing to other postsecondary learning opportunities.? Can the same be said for advanced science coursework including chemistry and physics? Will those who cannot master these rigorous courses be denied a high school diploma? Aldous Huxley’s view of a well-rounded education or the provision of exposure to mandated coursework that would have not taken place based on students’ preferences may be an antiquated vision. Agreement in terminating the traditional four-year high school experience at age 16 or 17 and creating a path for those desiring the required, or needed additional coursework has been promoted in recent years. Those who would like to take the extra coursework can earn a designated diploma that spells out their additional course taking. John Goodlad suggests, along with others, that students at age 16 receive an initial certificate of mastery and then become involved in a selected, specialized area of training or service, and community-based learning. All students up until age 16 would take a core curriculum, steeped in stringent academics coupled with hands-on learning opportunities. This fourth phase of education would be a combination of work, study, and community service to help facilitate students' transition into careers, higher education, and adult responsibilities. Two different diplomas should be offered: A Diploma of Secondary Education (DSE) would reward successful work in three of the schools' central academic areas, Mathematics/Science, the Arts, and History/Philosophy. This DSE should also include some interdisciplinary subjects and would represent solid accomplishments worthy of 159 college admission. Most students could complete this by age 17. The second, an Advanced Secondary Diploma (ASD), would recognize the culmination of advanced academic work (advanced placement courses). Students who choose to enter it would utilize this Early College program. The Early College serves as a bridge between school and college or work. Marc Tucker who has written extensively about the American high school suggests there should be three tiers in school. Skill levels of individuals in society should encompass three distinct, separate tiers. Tier III, at the top, is a job-specific classification, where individuals must meet a certain set of standards that allow them to be an oil field rigger or the operator of a machine that performs lithographic functions in the semiconductor fabrication sector. These standards are prescribed by collective organizations that hire these individuals, mirroring the manner in which the aircraft industry sets tolerance and failure rates in the construction of new aircraft. Tier II, the next level of qualification, groups skill levels that require broadly similar skills into clusters. Manufacturing technicians, who would have the ability to move from industry to industry, provide an example of this qualification level. The last level, Tier I, known as the Certificate of Initial Mastery, lies with the elementary and secondary schools. Many have cited the absence of set standards in our high schools, while the time in seat, commonly referred to as the Carnegie unit system remains constant. Tucker suggests that these variables be juxtaposed: Standards should be set in benchmarks and absolutes, while the time is varied on the basis of individual talent. Some 160 could reach this standard at age 14, while others would be considerably older. The Commission of The Education and the Economy’s report, which Marc Tucker chaired, in their latest edition, specifically calls for a similar combination of these approaches where students will make choices based on their individual skill level and career preferences. Many of the European apprenticeship models follow this prescriptive remedy where some opt to exit at age 16 or 17 and pursue apprenticeships. Those that are seeking careers in highly technical fields will attend advance technical schools with high level coursework and participate in an apprenticeship simultaneously. There are many questions that remained to be answered. Is change needed? Are we making sufficient progress? Are we making change happen in a timely way? Is the American High School with its leadership team making headway in responding to changes in the world? Like any change initiative it is a matter of approximations. The trends appear to indicate that we are moving in a direction where the divides between the worlds of school and work the precipice is narrowing. The integration of technical subject matter and academic coursework is underway in some districts and schools. Many more students today are looking more closely at their academic preparation and the connection it has to their adult lives. By no means have we finally arrived. There is much work to be done. The song remains the same. Change rests on the leaders’ shoulders. Leaders must be willing to listen, to be brave, creative, open, to take risks, to ask the tough questions and to be honest in their responses. Change is not easy. It is important that leadership be 161 reminded that students are the focal point. Ultimately any and all school change should be initiated and implemented on meeting the needs of all children where we may have to expand, create, and individualize the secondary learning experience. 162 References Adler, M. (1984). The Padeia program: An educational syllabus. New York: Macmillan. Alinsky, S. (1971). Rules for radicals: A pragmatic primer for realistic radicals. New York: Random House. Altenbaugh, R.J., Engel, D.E., & Martin, D.T. (1995). Caring for kids: A critical study of urban school leavers. London: Falmer. American Center for Technical and Career Education. (2006). ACTE voices position on high school reform. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers. March 2006. Anyon, J. (1997). Ghetto schooling: A political economy of urban education reform. New York: Teachers College Press. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (1986). School reform policy: A call to reason. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Awbrey, S. (2005). General education reform as organizational change: Integrating cultural and structural change. The Journal of General Education 54 (1), 1-21. Bailey, T. (1990). Changes in the nature and structure of work: Implications for skill requirements and skill formation. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education. Bailey, T., Hughes, K., & Karp, M. (2002). What role can dual enrollment programs play in easing the transition between high school and postsecondary education? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED465090) Bailey, W.J. (Ed.) (1997). Organizing schools: Educational leadership for the 21st century. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing. Barker, S.L.(2001). Formula for success: A handbook for insuring a quality teacher for every child in San Diego County. San Diego, CA: San Diego County Office of Education. Barton, P. (Ed.) (1978). Implementing new education - work policies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 163 Barton, P. (1996). A school to work transition system: The role of standards and assessment. In L.B. Resnick & J.G. Wirt (Eds), Linking school and work: Roles for standards and assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Barton, P. (1997). From school to work. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service Policy Information Center. Barton, P. (2005). One-third of a nation: Rising dropout rates and declining opportunities. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED485192). Barton, P. (2006). High school reform and work: Facing labor market realities. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Policy Information Center. Benz, P., Lindstrom, C., Unruh, B., & Waintrup, D. (2004). Sustaining secondary transition programs in local schools. Remedial and Special Education 25(1), 39- 50. Berry, B.J., Conkling, E.C., & Ray, D.M. (1993). The global economy: Resource use, locational choice, and international trade. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Black, J. (2004). Reform at the top. The American School Board Journal 191(5), 36-38. Blackorby, J., & Edgar, E. (1991). A third of our youth? A look at the problem of high school dropout among students with mild disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 25(1), 102. Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1996). Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the national longitudinal transition study. Exceptional Children, 62(5), 399-413. Blanchett, W., Mumford, V., & Beachum, F. (2005). Urban school failure and disproportionality in a post-Brown era. Remedial & Special Education 26(2) 70- 81. Blank, R., & Shipp, S. (1994). Voices of diversity: Real people talk about problems and solutions in a workplace where everyone is not alike. New York: American Management Association. Blankenstein, A.M. (2004). Failure is not an option: Six principals that guide student achievement in high performing schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 164 Boesel, D., & McFarland, L. (1994). National assessment of vocational education: Final Report to Congress. Volume I. Summary and Recommendations. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 371 191) Bowe, J., Bowe, M., & Streeter, S. (2000). In J. Bowe, M. Bowe, & S. Streeter (Eds.), Gig: Americans talk about their jobs at the turn of the millennium. New York: Random House. Boyer, E.L. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper & Row. Brandt, R. (1990). Overview: Changing schools—but how? Educational Leadership 47 (8), 2. Bresford, B. (2004). On the road to nowhere? Young disabled people and transition. Child Care Health and Development 30(6), 581-587. Broad Academy: Broad Residency in Urban Education. (n.d.). Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://www.broadacademy.org/ Budig, G.A. (2006). Writing: A necessary tool. 87(9), 663-672. Bullock, L., & Gable, R. (2006). Programs for children and adolescents with emotional and behavioral disorders in the United States: A historical overview, current perspectives, and future directions. Preventing School Failure, 50(2), 7-13. Retrieved July 1, 2009, from Education Research Complete database Burnaford, G., Fischer, J. & Hobson, D. (Eds.) (2001). Teachers doing research: The power of action through inquiry. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Cahn, R.M. (1983). The pocket chartroom. New York: Goldman Sachs. California Department of Education. (2000). Spring 2000 language census. Sacramento, CA: Author. California Department of Education. (2003). Transition to adult living: A guide for secondary education. Sonoma, CA: California Services for Technical Assistance and Training (CalSTAT). 165 California Department of Education. (2002). Aiming high: High schools for the 21 st century. High School Initiatives Office, High School Leadership Division. Sacramento: Author. California State University. (2001) Meeting California’s need for the education doctorate: A report examining California’s needs for more holders and suppliers of education doctorates. CSU Office of the Chancellor. Long Beach, CA: Author. Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy (1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21 century. Washington, DC: Carnegie Forum on Education and the st Economy. Carnevale, A.P., & Stone, S.C. (1995). The American mosaic. New York: McGraw-Hill. Cegelka, P.T. (1988). Multicultural considerations. In E.W. Lynch & R.B. Lewis (Eds.), Exceptional children and adults (pp. 545–587). Glenview, I.L.: Scott Foresman. Charlton, A. (September 13, 2006). Students in richer nations slipping: They lack ambition to prepare for the 21 century demands, a study finds. Associated Press: st The Philadelphia Inquirer, p.1. Chemers, M.M., Oskamp S., & Costanzo, M.A. (Eds.) (1995). Diversity in organizations: New perspectives for a changing workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Children’s Defense Fund (2005). The state of America’s children. Washington, DC.: Author. Clement, M.D. (2000). Building the best faculty: Strategies for hiring and supporting new teachers. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press. Clinton, H.R., & Magaziner, I. (1992). Will America choose high skills or low wages? Educational Leadership, 49(6), 10-13. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (1998). Teacher research: The question that persists. In International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, Vol. 1, No. 1, 19-36. Cohen, A.M., & Brower F.B. (1989). The American Community College (2 ed.). San nd Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cohen, D.K., & Ball, D.L. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 347-353. 166 Cohen, M. (1990). Key issues confronting state policy makers. In R. F. Elmore and Associates (Eds.), Restructuring schools: The next generation of educational reform (pp. 251-285). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Colvin, G. (2005). In the relentless, global, tech driven, cost-cutting struggle for business, America is not ready. Fortune 152(2), 70-75. Corbett, W.P., Sanders, R.L., Clark, H.B., & Blank, W. (2002). Employment and social outcomes associated with vocational programs for youths with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders 27(4), 358-370. Corey, S. (1953). Action research to improve school practices. New York: Teachers College Press. Coteryahn, K., & Davis, D. (2004). Trends you need to know. Training and development, 58(1). 28-36. Cuban, L. (1984). School reform by remote control: SB 813 in California. Phi Delta Kappan 66(3), 213-215. Cuban, L. (1988). The managerial imperative: The practice of leadership in the schools. New York: Suny Press. Cunningham, P.M., & Allington, R.L. (1999). Classrooms that work: They can all read and write. New York: Longman. Curran, P. (2005). Graduation counts: A report of the National Governors Association task force on state high school graduation data. Washington, DC: National Governors Association. Curriculum Integration in School-to-Work Systems (1996). http://www.stw.ed.gov/ factsht/bull 1196.htm Daggett, W., & McNulty. (2005). Best practices of high performing of high performing high schools. Leadership, 12-15. Dahm, L. (1996). Education at home, with help from school. Educational Leadership 54 (2), 68-71. Darling-Hammond, L. (1988). Policy and professionalism. In A. Liberman (Ed.), Building a professional culture in schools. (pp. 55-77). New York: Teachers College Press. Deal, T. (1990). Reforming reform. Educational Leadership 47(8), 6-12. 167 Deal, T.E., & Peterson, K.D. (1999) Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Deal, T.M., & Kennedy, A.A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Moro Park, CA: Addison-Wesley. Deluca, D., & White, R. (1998). School-to-work transition in the United States: Forging a system for the future from the lessons of the past. In T. Lange (Ed.), Understanding the school-to-work transition: An international perspective (pp 7- 24). Connack: Nova Science Publishers. Dembicki, M. (1997). Despite unrecognized term, public backs school to work. Education Week, October 1, 1997. Denning, P.J., & Metcalfe, R.M. (1997). Beyond calculations: The next fifty years of computing. New York: Springer-Verlag. Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press. Dick, B., & Swenson, P. (1997). Action research FAQ: “frequently asked questions” file (online). Available at http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/cr/arp/arfaq. Dreyfoss, J.G. (1999). Safe passage: Making it through adolescence in a risky society. New York: Oxford University Press. Driscoll, C. (2005). Proposed funding for President’s high school reform plan misses the mark. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers 80(3), 8. Drucker, P.F. (1994). The age of social transformations. Atlantic Monthly, 274(5), 53-80. Drucker, P.F. (1995). Managing in a time of great change. New York: Dutton/Truman Talley. Dorn, S. (1996). Creating the dropout: An institutional and social history of school failure. Westport, CT: Praeger. Duffy, J. (1998) Home schooling: Friend or foe. Principal 77(5), 23-27. 168 Dunn, C., Chambers, D., & Rabren, K. (2004). Variables affecting students’ decisions to drop out of school. Remedial and Special Education 25(5) 314-323. Edgar, E. (1987). Secondary programs in special education: Are many of them justifiable? Exceptional Children 52, 115-122. Eisner, E.W. (1994). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (3 ed.). New York: Macmillan College Publishing Company. rd Elmore, R.F., Peterson, P.L., & McCarthey, S.J. (1990). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and school organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Engel, D.E. (1994). Life after dropping out. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Dropout Prevention Conference (6 , San Jose, CA). th ERIC Review (1996) School to work transition. 4(2). Washington, DC. Educational Resources Information Center. Evans, R. (1996). The human side of school change: Reform, resistance, and the real life problems of innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Elements of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act: Connecting Activities (1998). <http://www.stw.ed.gov//factsht/fac3.htm > Fine, M. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban public high school. Albany: State University of New York Press. Finn, C.E., & Gau, R.L. (1998) New ways of education The Public Interest, 130, 79-92. Finn, C.E., & Kanstoroon, M. (2001). Impressing, empowering, dismantling. The Public Interest, 140, 64-73. Fischer, J.C. (2001). Action research rationale and planning: Developing a framework for teacher inquiry. In G. Burnaford, J. Fischer, & D. Hobson (Eds.), Teachers doing research: The power of action through inquiry. Mawhah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Friedman, D.L. (2006). The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux. Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press. 169 Fullan, M.G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press. Fullan, M.G. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Furney, K., & Hasazi, S. (1997). Transition policies, practices, and promises: Lessons from three states. Exceptional Children, 63(3), 343-355. Fushay, A.W., & Wann, K.D. & Associates. (1954). Children’s social values: An action research study. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College. Gabbard, D.A. (Ed.). (2000). Knowledge and power in the global economy: Politics and the rhetoric of school reform. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum. Gill, A.M., & Leigh, P.E. (2003). Do the returns to community colleges differ between academic and vocational programs? Journal of Human Resources 38(1), 134-155 Gitlin, T. (2001). Media unlimited: How the torrent of images and sounds overwhelms our lives. New York: Holt. Glasser, W. (1998). The quality school teacher: A companion volume to the quality school. New York: Harper Collins. Glenn, C.L. (1998). Public school choice: Searching for direction. Principal 77(5), 9-12. Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. Goodlad, J. (1976).A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw- Hill. Goodlad, J. (2004). A place called school. Special 20 anniversary edition. New York: th McGraw Hill. Goodlad, J., Mantle-Bromley, C., & Goodlad, S. J. (2004). Education for everyone: Agenda for education in a democracy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gordon, E.E., Morgan, R.R., & Ponticell, J.A. (1994). Future-work: The revolution reshaping American business. Westport, CT: Praeger. Gorgiulo, R.M. (2006). Special education in contemporary society (2 ed.). Belmont, nd CA: Thompson Waadsworth. 170 Grady, M.D. (1998). Qualitative and action research: A practitioner’s handbook. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa. Griffiths, C. (2003). Accountability systems in vocational education: Performance standards and core measures. In R. Nata (Ed.), Vocational Education: Current Issues and Prospects (pp. 64-102). New York: Nova Science. Grubb, W.N. (Ed.) (1995). Education through occupations in American high schools. Vol. I and II. Williston, VT: Teachers College Press. Grubb, W.N., & Bradway (1998). Linking school-based and work-based learning: The implications of LaGuardia’s Co-Op seminars for school-to-work programs. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 418 230) Hall, G.E., & Hord, S.M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: State University of New York Press. Halperin, S. (1994). School to work: A larger vision. Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum. Halperin, S. (1997). School-to-work, employers, and personal values. Education Week, 16 (24), 38-52. Hamilton, S.F. (1987). Raising standards and reducing dropout rates. In G. Natriello (Ed.), School dropouts. New York: Teachers College Press. Hamilton, S.F., & Hamilton, M.A. (1994). Opening career paths for youth: What can be done? Who can do it? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374 265) Hamilton, S.F., & Hamilton, M.A. (1997a) When is work a learning experience? Phi Delta Kappan 78(9), 682- 689. Hamilton, S.F., & Hamilton, M.A. (1997b) When is learning work-based? Phi Delta Kappan 78(9), 677-681. Hansen, J.S. (1994). Preparing for the workplace: Charting a course for post-secondary training. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Hanson, E.M. (1991). Educational administration and organizational behavior (3 ed.). rd Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 171 Hardman, M.L., Drew, C.J., & Egan, M.W. (1999). Human exceptionality: Society, school and family (6 ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. th Hargreaves, A. (1997). Rethinking educational change with heart and mind. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), ACSD yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, P. (2006). Educational change over time: The sustainability and non-sustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly 42(1), 3-41. Hartoonian, M., & Van Scotter, R. (1996). School-to-work: A model for learning a living. Phi Delta Kappan, April. Harvey, J., & Housman, P. (2004). Crisis or possibility? Conversations about the American high school. Washington, DC: National High School Alliance. Hassel, B.C. (1999). The charter school: Avoiding the pitfalls, fulfilling the promise. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. Hoye, J.D., & Stern, D. (2008). The career academy story. Education Week 28(3), 24-26. Hayward, G.C., & Benson, C.S. (1993). Vocational-technical: Major reforms and debates 1917- present. Washington, DC: Department of Education Office of Vocational and Adult Education. Heller, D. (2004). Teachers wanted: Attracting and retaining good teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Hoochlander, E.G.; Kaufman, P, Levesque, & Houser, T. (2003). Vocational Education in the United States 1969-1990. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Houston, P. (2006). Intelligent redesign. School Administration 63(1), 10-14. Howard, V.A. (1998). Seasons of learning. Westport, CT: Praeger. Howley, A., Andrionaivo, S., & Perry, J. (2005). The pain outweighs the gain: Why teachers don’t want to become principals. Teacher College Record 107(4), 757- 782. Hubbard, R.S.. & Power, B.M. (1999). Living the questions: A guide for teacher researchers. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. 172 Hull, D., & Parnell, D. (1991). Tech prep associate degree: A win/win experience. Wasco, TX: Center for Occupational Research and Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 331-539) Hull, K., Goldhaber, J., & Capone, A. (2002). Opening doors: An introduction to inclusive early childhood education. Boston: Houston. Jackson, A. (2004). Preparing urban youths to succeed in the interconnected world of the 21 century. Phi Delta Kappan 86(3), 210-213. st Jackson, S.E., & Ruderman, M.N. (1996). Diversity in work teams: Research paradigms for a changing workplace. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Jerald, C.D. (2006). Identifying potential dropouts: Key lessons for building an early warning system. New York: Achieve Inc., America Diploma Project Network. Jobs for the Future (1994). Learning that works: A school-to-work briefing book. Cambridge, MA: Jobs for the Future. Johnson, D. (2002). Challenges facing secondary and transition services for youth with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children 34(3), 86-91. Johnson, J., and others. (1997). Getting by: What American teenagers really think about their schools. New York: Public Agenda Foundation. Johnson, J. (1995) Assignment incomplete: The unfurnished business of education reform. New York: Public Agenda Foundation. Johnson, S.M. (1988). Pursuing professional reform in Cincinnati. Phi Delta Kappa 69 (10), 746-751. Johnson, S.M. (1980). Redesigning teachers’ work. In R. F. Elmore and Associates (Eds.). Restructuring schools: The next generation of education and reform (pp. 125-151). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Joint Council on Economic Education. (1989). Time Magazine. January 9, 1989, 48. Kauffinan, J. (1989). Characteristics of behavior disorders of children and youth (4 th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill. 173 Kazis, R. (1993). Improving the transition from school to work in the U.S. Cambridge, MA: Jobs for the Future. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 353- 454) Keating, J, Medrich, E., Vollcoff, V., & Perry, J. (2002) Comparative study of vocational education and training systems: National vocational education and training systems across three regions under pressure of change. (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service) Kemp, S.E. (2006). Dropout policies and trends for students with and without disabilities. Adolescence 41(162) 235-250. Kemple, J.J. (2002). The federal role in vocational and technical education at the secondary level: Principles for moving toward a greater emphasis on supporting systematic innovation and rigorous evaluation. (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service, ED 467 911) Kennedy, M.M. (1997). The connection between research and practice. Educational Researcher, 26(7), 4-12. Kirk, S.A., Gallagher, J.J., & Anastasiow, N.J. (2000). Educating exceptional children (9 ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. th Kliebard, H.M. (1999). Schooled to work: Vocationalism and the American curriculum 1876-1946. New York: Teachers College Press. Kliebard, H.M. (2004). The struggle for an American curriculum 1893-1958 (3 ed.). rd New York: Routledge Falmes. Kolderie, T. (1998). What are the alternatives? Principal 77(5), 5-8. Kosper, H.T. (2003). The changing role of the community college. Occupational Outlook Quarterly 46(4), 14-21. Kozol, J. (2000). Ordinary resurrections: Children in the years of hope. New York: Crown Publishers. Krieg, F.J., and others (1995). Transition: Student to work. Models for effective transition planning. Bethesda, MD: National Associates of School Psychologists. Kronick, R.F., & Hargis (1998). Dropouts: Who drops out and why—and the recommended action. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, Ltd. 174 Langdon, C.A. (1996). The third Phi Delta Kappa poll of teachers attributes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan. November. Langdon, D. (2001). State of schools. San Diego, CA: Learning Resources and Educational Technology, San Diego County Office of Education. Lee, L. (2000). Success without college. New York: Doubleday. Lehr, C., Johnson, D., Bremer, C., Cosio, A., & Thompson. (2004). Increasing rates of school completion: Moving from policy and research to practice. A manual for policymakers, administrators, and educators. Essential tools. Duluth: National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET), University of Minnesota. Lekes, N., Bragg, D.D., Loeb, J.W., Oleksin, C.A.:, Marszalek, J., Brooks-Laraviere, M., Zhu, R., et al. (2007). Career and technical education pathway programs academic performance and the transition from college and career. Duluth: National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, University of Minnesota. Lemke, M., & Gonzalez, P. (2006). US student and adult performance on international assessments of educational achievement: Findings from the Condition of Education 2006 (NCES 2006-073). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Lerner, J. (1988). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies. (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Lewis, A. (2004). Rethinking the American high school. Tech Directions 64(1), 5-6. Lewis, A. (2005). The high school initiative. Tech Directions 64(6), 5-6. Lines, P.M. (1996). Home schooling comes of age. Educational Leadership 54(2), 63-67. Lines, P.M. (2000). Home schooling comes of age. The Public Interest, 140, 74-85. Lugaila, T.A. (1998). Current population reports, population characteristics. Washington, DC: Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistic Administration. Lyman, I. (1998). Home schooling: Back to the future. Policy Analysis No. 294. Washington, DC: Cato Institute. 175 Lyman, L.L. (2000). How do they know you care? The principal’s challenge. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Lynch, R.L. (2003) Vocational teacher education in U.S. colleges and universities and its responsiveness to the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act of 1990. In R. Nata (Ed.), Vocational education: Current issues and prospects (pp. 29-51). New York: Nova Science. Machiavelli, N. (1958). The prince. New York: Dutton. MacMillan, D.L. (1991). Hidden youth: Dropouts from special education. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children. Marshall,C., & Rossman,G.B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications. Marshall, R., & Tucker, M.S. (1992). Thinking for a living: Education and the wealth of nations. New York: Basic Books. Marzano R.J., Waters, T., & McNulty B.A. (2005) School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Maxwell, N.L. (2007). Smoothing the transition from school to work: Building job skills for a local labor market. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. MCMcClure, P. (2005). Where standards come from. Theory Into Practice, 44(1), 4-10. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ724992) McKinney, J.R. (1996). Charter schools: A new barrier for children with disabilities. Educational Leadership 54,(2), 22-25. McNeil, J.D. (1990). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction. Los Angeles: Harper Collins. Middlewood, D., Coleman, J., & Lunby, J. (Eds.). (1999). Practitioner research in education: Making a difference. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Miller, B., & Kantrov, I. (1998). Casework on school reform. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Mills, G.E. (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 176 Molnar, A. (1996). Charter schools: The smiling face of disinvestments. Educational Leadership 54,(2), 9-15. Molnar, A., Farrell, W.C. Johnson, J.H., Jr., & Sapp, M. (1996). Research, politics, and the school choice agenda! Phi Delta Kappan. November. Morse, J.M., & Richards, L. (2007). Readme first for a user’s guide to qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Mullis, I., Dossey, J., Owen, E., & Phillips, G. (1991). The state of mathematics achievement: NAEP’s 1990 assessment of the nation and the trial assessment of the states. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED330545) Murphy, J. (Ed.) (1990a). The educational reform movement of the 1980s: Perspectives and cases. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Murphy, J. (1990b). The reform of school administration: Pressures and calls for change. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational reform movement of the 1980s: Perspectives and cases (pp. 277-303). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Murphy, J. (1997). Restructuring through school-based management. In T. Townsend (Ed.), Restructuring and auality: Issues for tomorrow’s schools (pp. 35-55). London: Routledge. Murphy, J., Gilmer, S.W., Weise R., & Page, A. (1998) Pathways to privatization in education. Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing. Murphy, J., & Forsythe, P.B. (Eds.) (1999). Educational administration: A decade of reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Nata, R. (Ed.) (2003). Vocational education: Current issues and prospects. New York: Nova Science. Nathan, J. (1996). Early lessons of the charter movement. Educational Leadership 54 (2), 16-20. National Assessment for Educational Progress. (2000). NAEP 1999 trends in academic progress. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. http://nces.edu.gov/nationsreportcard. 177 National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce. (1995a). First findings from the EQW National Employer Survey (EQW catalog No. RE01). Philadelphia: National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce, University of Pennsylvania. National Center on Education Quality of the Workforce. (1995b). The other shoe: Education’s contribution to the productivity of establishments. A second round of findings from the EQW National Employer Survey (EQW No. RE02).. Philadelphia: National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce, University of Pennsylvania. National Center on Education and the Economy. (2007). Touch choices or tough times: the report of the new commission on the skills of the American workforce. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (1995). Legislative principles for career-related education and training: What research supports. Berkeley, CA: Author. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative of educational reform. Washington, DC. United States Government Printing Office. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1997). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. New York: Teacher’s College, Columbia University. National Conference of State Legislatures. School-to-work high yields for students, schools, parents, educators, employers, legislators, business communities and job markets: A guide for state legislators. Washington, DC: Author. National Governor’s Association. (1987). The Governors’ 1991 report on education time for results: 1987. Washington, DC: Author. National Governor’s Association. (1994). Developing systems of school-to-work transition: A report on state progress. Issue brief. Washington, DC: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374-223) National Governor’s Association. (2006). Closing the achievement gap 2006: An annual 50-state progress report on the alignment of high school policies with the demands of college and work. New York: Achieve Inc. 178 National High School Alliance. (2005). A call to action: Transforming high school for all youth. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership. Natriello, G., Pallas, A.M.., & McDill, E.L. (1986). A population at risk: Potential consequences of tougher school standards for student dropouts. American Journal of Education 94, 135-181. Naylor, M. (2002). Helping disadvantaged youth succeed in school: Effects of CTE- based whole school reforms. National Research Center for Career and Technical Education. Neumark, D. (2004). The effects of school-to-career programs on post-secondary enrollment and employment. San Francisco: Policy Institute of California. Neumark, D. (Ed.) (2003). Improving school to work transitions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Neumark, D. (2004). The effects of school-to-career programs on postsecondary enrollment and employment. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California. Neumark D. (Ed.). (2007) Improving school-to-work transitions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Neumark, D., & Rothstein, D. (2007). Do school-to-work programs help the “forgotten half?” In D. Neumark (Ed.), Improving school-to-work transitions (pp. 87-134). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Oakes, J., Quartz, K.H., Ryan, S., & Lipton, M. (2000). Becoming good American schools: The struggle for civic virtue in education reform. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Odden, A., & Marsh, D. (1988). How comprehensive reform legislation can improve secondary schools. Phi Delta Kapan, 69(8), 593-598. Odden, A., & Picus, L.O. (1992). School finance: A policy perspective. New York: McGraw-Hill. Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. (1989) Tenth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Washington, DC: Author. 179 Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. (1989) Eleventh Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Washington, DC: Author. Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. (1990) Twelfth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Washington, DC: Author. Olson, L. (1997a). The school-to-work revolution: How employers and educators are joining forces to prepare tomorrow’s skilled workforce. Reading, MA:; Addison- Wesley. Olson, L. (1997b). Head smart and hands on: What the school-to-work movement can do for reform. Education Week 17(4), 33. Olson, L. (1996). The game of life: When it comes to planning for careers, high school students don’t. Teacher, November-December 18-20. Olson, M.W. (1990). The teacher as researcher: A historical perspective. In M.W. Olson (Ed.), Opening the door to classroom research. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Organisation of Economic Co-Operation and Development (2006). Education at a glance, 2006. Paris: Author. Orr, M.T., Bailey, T., Hughes, K.L., Kienzl, G.S., & Karp, M.M. (2007). The National Academy Foundation’s career academies: Shaping post-secondary transitions. In D. Neumark (Ed.), Improving school-to-work transitions (pp. 169-209) New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Page, L,. & Levine, M. (1996). The pitfalls and triumphs of launching a charter school. Educational Leadership 54(2), 26-29. Parnell, D. (1992). Every student a winner: How tech prep can help students achieve career success. Vocational Educational Journal 67(4), 24-26, 52. Pascopella, A. (2006). American high school students fall behind other countries. District Administrator. August. Patterson, W. (2003). Breaking out of our boxes. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(8) 569. Paulson, A. (2006). Dropout rates high, but fixes underway. The Christian Science Monitor, March 3. 180 Perie, M., Moran, R., Lutkus, A., & National Center for Education Statistics (DHEW). (2005). The nation’s report card. NAEP 2004 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance in reading, 1971-2004 and mathematics, 1973- 2004. NCES 2005-464. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED485627) Person, A.E., & Rosenbaum (2007). Labor market linkages among two year college faculty and their impact on student perceptions, effort, and college persistence In D. Neumark (Ed.), Improving school-to-work transitions (pp. 210-246). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Pearson, R.C. (1996) Homeschooling: What educators should know. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 402 135) Perry, E.A. (1998). Charter schools: Friend or foe. Principal 77(5), 19-22. Peterson, P. (1983). Did the education commissions say anything? Brookings Review, 3-11. Phelps, L.A. (2006). Career and technical education in Wisconsin’s new economy: Challenges and investments imperatives. The Wisconsin School Finance Adequacy Initiative CPRE/WCER. Madison: University of Wisconsin. Phelps, R., Farsad, B., & Farris, E. (2003). Features of occupational programs at the secondary and post-secondary education levels. R. Nata (Ed.), Vocational education: Current issues and prospects (pp. 1-28). New York: Nova Science. Postman, N. (1995). The End of cducation: Redefining the value of school. New York: Random House. Pulliam, J.D. (1987). History of education in America (4 ed.) Columbus,OH: Merrill. th Quinn, R.E. (1996). Deep change: Discovering the leader within. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Quinones, M.A., & Ehrenstein, A. (1997). Training for a rapidly changing workplace: Applications of psychological research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Rallis, S.F., & Golding, E.G. (2000). Principals of dynamic schools: Taking charge of change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 181 Rand Change Agent Study. (1977). Federal programs supporting education change: Factors affecting implementation and continuation. Vol. 3 (R-158917-HWE). Washington, DC: Berman & McLaughlin. Rayfield, R., & Diamantes, T. (2004). Task analysis of the duties performed in secondary school administration. Education 124 (4), 709-712. Reed, D., Jespsen, & Hill, L.E. (2003). Transitions to work for racial, ethnic, and immigration groups. In D. Neumark (Ed.), Improving school to work transitions (pp. 24-58). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Reich, R.B.(2002). I’ll be short: Essentials for a decent working society. Boston: Beacon Press. Reller, D.J. (1984). The Peninsula Academies final technical evaluation report. Palo Alto, CA. America Institute for Research in the Behavioral Sciences. Reller, D.J. (1985). The Peninsula Academies, interim evaluation report, 1984-1985. Palo Alto, CA. America Institute for Research in the Behavioral Sciences. Reller, D.J. (1987). A longitudinal study of the graduates of the Peninsula Academies & final report. Palo Alto, CA. America Institute for research in the Behavioral Sciences. Report to Congress. (1997). Implementation of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act. Washington, DC: Department of Education and Labor. Report of the Independent Commission on Population and Quality of Life. (1996). Caring for the future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reschly, A., & Christenson, S. (2006). Prediction of dropout among students with mild disabilities: A case for the inclusion of student engagement variables. Remedial & Special Education, 27(5), 276-292. Resnick, L.B. (1987a). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Resnick, L B.(1987b). The 1987 E ARA presidential address: Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher 16(9), 13-20. Resnick, L.B., & Wirt, J.G. (Eds.). (1996). Linking school and work: Roles for standards and assessments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 182 Robbins, S.P. (1996). Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies, applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Simon & Shuster Company. Roderick, M. (1993). The path to dropping out: Evidence for intervention. Westport, CT: Auburn House. Rose, L., Gallup, A., & Elam, S. (1997). The 29th annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the public’s attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(1), 41-56. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ550560) Rosenbaum, J.E. (2002). Beyond empty promises: Policies to improve transitions into colleges and jobs. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 465094) Rosenbaum, J.E., & Kariya, T. (1991). Do school achievements affect the early jobs of high school graduates in the United States and Japan? Sociology of Education, 64, 79-95. Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2002). Multicultural students with special language needs: Practical strategies for assessment and intervention. Oceanside, CA: Academic Communications Associates. Rossow, L.F., & Warner, L.S. (2000). The principalship: Dimensions in instructional leadership. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. Rotberg, I. (2005). A special section on international education: Tradeoffs, societal values, and school reform. Phi Delta Kappan 86(8), 611-619. Ryan, R.D., & Imel, S. (1996). School-to-work transition: Genuine reform or the latest fad? Eric Review 4(2), 2-11. Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research (ACSD. LB 1028.24 S.34). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. San Diego Unified School District. (2003). Pupil racial/ethic census 2003-2004. Institute for Learning. San Diego, CA: Author. Sarason, S.B. (1997) How schools might be governed and why. New York: Teachers College Press. Sarason, S.B. (1998) Charter schools: Another flawed educational reform. New York: Teachers College Press. 183 Scales, P.C. (1996). Boxed in and bored: How middle schools continue to fail young adolescents . . . and what good middle schools do right. Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute. (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED 406 506) Schlechty, P.C. (1997). Inventing better schools: An action plan for educational reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Schlechty, P.C. (2001). Shaking up the schoolhouse: How to support and sustain educational innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994, Pub. L. No 103-239, 108 Stat. 568 (May 4, 1994). School to Work Programs. (1993). Washington, DC: Raynor Cannostra Associates, Edison Electric Institute. Schorr, L.B. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage. New York: Doubleday. Sconyers, N. (1996). What parents want: A report on parents’ opinions about public schools. Washington, DC: Center on Families, Communities, and Children’s Learning. Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service No ED 400-079) Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. (1991). What work requires of schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Senge, P. (1996). Leading learning organizations. Training & Development, 50(12), 36. Sharon, S., Shachar, H., & Levine, T. (1999) The innovative school: Organization and instruction. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. Shohov, T. (2003). Selected bibliography. In R. Nata (Ed.), Vocational education: Current issues and prospects (pp.187-217). New York: Nova Science. Silverman, D. (1997). Qualitative research: Theory, method, and practice. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publication. Sinclair, M., Christenson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 465-482. 184 Sizer, T.R. (1984). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Sizer, T.R. (1992). Horace’s school: Redesigning the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Smith, I., & Johnson, R.E. (2003). To attend or not to attend: Guiding all students in the right direction. Journal of College Admissions, 1(79), 2-5. Smyth, J. (1992). Looking for the powerbrokers in your setting. In N. Haggerson & A. Bowman (Eds.), Informing educational policy and practice through interpretive inquiry. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing. Snyder, P., & McMullan. (1987). Allies in education: A profile in Philadelphia high school academies. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures. Spring, J. (1993). Conflict of interest: Politics of American education. New York: Longman. State of California, Department of Finance. (2003) California 2000 population distribution in proximity to public postsecondary institutions. Sacramento: Author. Stasz, C., Kaganoff, T., & Eden, R.A. (1994). Integrating academic and vocational education: A review of the literature, 1987-1992. The Journal of Vocational Education Research 19(2), 25-72. Stern, D., Bailey, T., & Merritt, D. (1996). School-to-work policy insights from recent international developments. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education. Stern, D., Raby, M., & Dayton, C. (1992). Career Academies: Partnerships for restructuring American high schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Stern, D., Wu, C., Dayton, C., & Maul, A. (2007). Learning by doing career academies. In D. Neumark (Ed.), Improving school-to-work transitions (pp. 134-168). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Stone, J.R., & Aliagos, O.A. (2007). Participation in career and technical education and school to work in American high schools. In Neumark (Ed.), Improving school-to- work transitions (pp. 59-86). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 185 Terkel, S. (1974). Working: People talk about what they do all day and how they feel about what they do. New York: The Hearst Corporation. Thornburg, D.D. (1992). Edutrends 2000: Restructuring, technology and the future of education. Starsong Publications. Toch, T. (2003). High schools on a human scale: How small schools can transforms American education. Boston: Beacon Press. Trueba, H. (1988). Culturally based explanations of minority students’ academic achievement. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 19(3), 270-87. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ377129) Tucker, M.S. (1991). Designing the new American high school. Washington, DC: National Alliance for Restructuring Education. Tucker, M.S. (1996). Skills standards, qualifications, systems, and the American workforce. In L.B. Resnik & J.G. Wirt (Eds.), Linking school and work: Roles for standards and Aasessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Uhler, S. (1979). Urban education: Dilemmas, detriments, and deceptions with recommendations. Education, 100(1). Uline, R,. & Johnson, S. (2005). This issue: Closing achievement gaps: What will it take? Theory Into Practice 44(1), 1-3. U.S. Department of Education. (1988). To assure the free appropriate publication of all handicapped children: Tenth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Twenty-fourth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Uy, E. (2008). Experts: Candidates should link education and economy Education Daily (173), 1-4. Van Laar, C. (2001). Declining optimism in ethnic minority students: The role of attributions and self-esteem. In F. Salili, C.Y. Chiu, & Y.Y. Hong. (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context of learning. New York: Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers. 186 Verma, G.K., & Mallick, K. (1999). Researching education: Perspectives and techniques. London: Falmer Press. Vo, C.D. (1996). A community surfaces out of the crowd. Techniques, November/ December, 18-22. Waggoner, D. (1991). Undereducation in America: The demography of high school dropouts. New York: Auburn House. Wagner, T., & Sconyers, N. (1996). “Seeing” the school reform elephant: Connecting policy makers, parents, practitioners, and students. Washington, DC: Center on Families, Communities, Schools, and Children’s Learning. Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service No ED 400-078) Wallen, N.E., & Fraenkel, J.R. (2001). Educational research: A guide to the process. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Weagraff, P.J. (1971). Factors inhibiting the development of vocational education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Wehneyer, M.L., Agran, N., & Hughes, C. (2001). Teaching self-determination to students with disabilities: Basic skills for successful transition. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing. Weiler, J. (1998). Success for all: A summary of evaluations. ERIC/CUE Digest Number 139. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED425250) Westat (1991). OSEP task force for the improvement of data on school exit status: Draft recommendations. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. Wheatley, M.J. (1994). Leadership and the new science: Learning about organization from an orderly universe. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Will, M. (1984). Bridges from school to working life. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSER), the Rehabilitation Services Administration and National Institute of Handicapped Research. William T. Grant Foundation. (1988). The forgotten half: Non-college youth in America. Washington, DC: Commission on Work, Family, and Citizenship. William T. Grant Foundation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 290 82) 187 Wiseman, A.W., & Alromi, N.H. (2003). The employability imperative: Schooling for work as a national project. New York: Nova Science. Wonacott, M.E. (2003). History and evolution of vocational and career-technical education: A compilation. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career, and Vocational Education. Wong, H.K., & Wong, R.T. (1998). How to be an effective teacher: The first days of school. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications. Wong, K.K., & Rutledge. (Eds.). (2006). Systemwide efforts to improve academic achievement. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Wood, G.H. (1993). Schools that work: America's most innovative public education programs. New York: Plume. Wunacott, M.E. (2002). Vocational rehabilitation trends and alerts. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 462-549) Yesseldyke, J.E., Algozzine, B., & Thurlow, M.L. (2000) Critical issues in special education. New York: Houghton Mifflin Yudof, M.G., Kirp, D.L., & Levin, B. (1992). Education policy and the law. (3 ed.). St. rd Paul, MN: McCutchan. Zehr, M. (2006). US home schoolers push movement around the world. Education Week 25(16), 8. Zeni, J. (2001). Ethical issues in practitioner research. New York: Teachers College Press Columbia University. 188 Appendix A: Instructional Leaders’ Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.) 1). a. How long have you been an instructional leader in this School-to-Work program? b. How long has this program been in existence? 2). What role do you believe the instructional leader plays in the implementation of a School-to-Work program? 3). How were you selected to be an instructional leader in this type of program? 4). What other jobs have you held in the education field? 5). What other jobs have you had outside of the field of education? 6). Do you believe that your experience outside of the field of education contributed to you being selected for an instructional leader position in this program? 7). What skills do you believe are necessary in being an instructional leader in an effective School-to-Work program? 8). What are some of the practices that you as an instructional leader engage in that contributes to the success of this program? 9). What type of work based learning do the students you serve engage in? 10). What type of connecting activities between the school and the community have been utilized in this process? 11). What kind of barriers did you/your district encounter in creating a School-to-Work program? 189 12). If you were to implement a School-to-Work program today, what kind of barriers would you encounter? 13). a. Did you receive District, Central Office support for this program implementation? b. In what ways was that support/non-support manifested? 14). What were some of the criteria utilized in selecting teachers and support personnel for this program? 15). a.What percentage of your school day is dedicated to managerial tasks? b. What percentage of your school day is dedicated to the role of instructional leader? 16). What are some of the perceived benefits of implementing a School-to-Work program on the part of a) students, b) teachers, c) parents, d) employers? 17). What advice would you give to urban school districts investigating implementing a School-to-Work program? 190 Ia . Responses of Site Instructional Leaders from Instructional Leader’s Interview Protocol (I.L.I.P.) 1). How long have you been an instructional leader in this School-to-Work program? Alpha I: “I have been an instructional leader, principal for the last five years.” Beta I: “About two years.” Delta I: “It’s been almost five years.” Item Analysis: The compressed history of the School- to-Work (STW) legislation and implementation process indicates that instructional leaders have only been in their types of positions for a short time, or that they may be part of a second wave of hires there have been after this program was originally implemented. Throughout the span of 250 years arguments for and against vocational education curriculum options. The most wide sweeping federal legislation passed since the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 is the STWOA of 1994. A decade after its passage is still a work in process. These issues provide support for the analysis of this item demonstrates that time is a significant commodity when putting theory into practice. b. How long has this program been in existence? Alpha I: “Technical education has been in existence in this form or another for 30-40 years in the district.” Beta I: “This is something that has been done for 6 years.” Delta I: “We have been doing different programs like this for a while. I have been a principal here for 5 years in this type of program which has been around a while.” Item Analysis: There are varying degrees of perception on the part of instructional leaders who may see School to Work programs in the same framework as early vocational education programs or another form of such programs. While vocational education has a long history in education, one of the precepts of STW is the idea that it is a merger of both vocational education coupled with academic subject matter, preparing people for a wide variety of post secondary options (4 year colleges, technical schools, junior colleges, and competitive work settings.) are viewed as different concerns. Although the terms vocational education, STW, and career and technical education may on the part of different individuals they are often used interchangeably. Specific implementation of 191 STW may indicate the more contemporary creation of these programs while some would suggest that vocational education has an extensive history in America. 2). What role do you believe the instructional leader plays in the implementation of a School-to-Work program? Alpha I: “You must be a choreographer, be able to bring all the pieces together and make it work by cross integrating academic subject matter with technical coursework. It really is a tightrope walking act knowing that the applications of concepts actually go further than increasing API when kids see the connection. I have to be a teacher, coach to make this happen.” Beta I: “I wasn’t here. The district went in this direction because we had a lot of students failing. The district leaders felt they had to do something. They brought in people from out of district. They were looking for people after a few years that had strong vocational skills, knowing your trade paid off, for being an administrator. If you had only worked in schools it wouldn’t work. Believe me I know. A lot of principals were camp counselors, Sunday school teachers, elementary school teachers, and then said I’ll be a principal. This kind of program is different. You need out of school type experience. I know my trade well. I was manufacturing technology. You know numeric controlled manufacturing. That’s computer driven machining. Using computer technology and using your knowledge of various manufacturing equipment.” Delta I: “There are many ways that I help keep the program up and running. I know that that is important.” Item Analysis: These set of responses are varied with respondent Alpha I indicating he has played an integral role in implementation, while the other respondents see themselves removed from the process chronological events, implementation taking place before their tenure provides an explanation of this scenario. Two of the latter respondents do not see a direct link between their practices, role and the effect it has had on STW implementation. It is noteworthy that Alpha I, addresses the need for a choreographer who can put the pieces together, orchestrating the activities, the connecting of various players including industry educators and students, a key concept of STWOA. Beta I places the focus on his expertise in the technical trade (numeric controlled manufacturing). The history of training vocational educators in America at times did not place the focus on trade expertise. He also addressed the integration of academic and always vocational coursework a key issue discussed repeatedly discussed in the review of the literature. 3). How were you selected to be an instructional leader in this type of program? 192 Alpha I: “I am sure my law enforcement background helped. In terms of leadership, following through, getting the job done. On top of that my industrial arts background. My work with wood, metals, auto technology over the years helped a great deal. The idea, that I worked with my hands and had experience problem solving as a carpenter and in law enforcement and in the industry. In this program it helps to have someone who can help teachers and kids to be connected with someone who works with their hands and works well with people. That means a lot. You have to be able to make the connections and have other people see the connections.” Beta I: “I was picked because of my strong vocational work history. They wanted a hands-on type person who was familiar with the trades. I had taught ROP classes and I thought this would be a great place to use my skills. I had a background in real technical machining shops doing airline building and modification work. Then I went into the manufacturing, not just fabrication of materials work. I was also a plant manager. In this job they wanted someone who knew what it was to work a trade. Before they picked me for this job, they had principals who just worked in schools.” Delta I: “I was interested in this position because I have a degree in Industrial Arts Education and my family has a construction company where we do commercial remodels. The interview people seemed interested in my problem solving skills that I used in the business. I worked on a lot of projects and that is how they knew I could do a good job.” Item Analysis: The trend in this small sample of three instructional leaders shows that a strong vocational background is essential in the selection of site instructional leaders. This cohort all has an extensive background in the “trades” and experience in teaching the trades. Problem solving is also mentioned by two of the respondents. Alpha I makes a strong case for his selection where he uses a combination of skills “works with your hands and works well with people”. The literature surrounding the Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (S.C.A.N.S.) skills cites the importance of these two different skills set. One of the disparities noted on the skills students exist secondary with and what is needed often points to getting along with others from diverse backgrounds and using team building to complete tasks assigned. 4). What other jobs have you held in the education field? Alpha I: “I was an industrial arts teacher and a coach, but before I found my niche in education. I was a Harbor Patrolman, which gave me some real insight later on.” Beta I: “I was a R.O.P teacher and I also taught academic classes that supported the trade classes.” Delta I: “I taught industrial arts, what we use to call wood shop.” 193 Item Analysis: The respondents all indicated knowledge in specific technical areas coupled with the evidence of teaching in these technical courses. One respondent indicated that the lack of efficacy of a former site instructional leader was evident and that it was linked to a dearth of experience outside of education. The responded summed up his performance that he didn’t work out because he only had school experience. 5). What other jobs have you had outside of the field of education? Alpha I: “My first career was in law enforcement, as a Harbor Patrolman. As a kid growing up I was always interested in working with wood, doing odd jobs to earn money. I got sidetracked in giving police work a try. Then I starting going to college at night in Industrial Arts Education. I got back to my passion. Combining working with people and using my hands. When I realized that it really all came together.” Beta I: “I worked in industry for a long time. Airline construction. A lot of real technical work with specs you wouldn’t believe. In that business you’ve got to get it right.” Delta I: “I think I may have been the only10th grader at the time that could read prints, blueprints. Since I can remember, I was always around the family commercial remodel business. Summers, school holidays, after school when it could be worked out. Then I got the idea I could teach. I thought that was a great way to show what I had learned and pass it to the following generations. If you teach any subject, many different subjects even more so, even more so, in a trade, you have to know it inside and out.” Item Analysis: Bringing skills from outside of education seems to be a preference in the selection of site leaders in STW programs. Perspectives garnered from those experiences outside of education appeared to be valued in programs that prepare students for the real world. This is a logical assumption as STW programs provide linkages in many different ways to the world outside of school. The academic literature surrounding the legislation and a corresponding philosophical prelude point to the need and mandate of leadership with experience in many different settings removed from education environments. 6). Do you believe that your experience outside of the field of education contributed to you being selected for an instructional leader position in this program? Alpha I: “I am sure this played big in my selection process. The bulk of experiences that I have had with people from all walks of life in law enforcement. In that field I routinely was involved with backgrounds similar to the one our students present. Poverty, no real positive perspective on their futures, often lost. My teaching ability, my coaching. There is no question about that.” 194 Beta I: “They said in the interview they wanted someone with a work history, dealing with heavy trades background, and being a plant manager, delivery schedules, quality control and personnel helped too.” Delta I: “Being able to do it and teach it too. They had seen my work with kids. They knew what my work ethic was.” Item Analysis: The respondents’ words centered on a combination of skills, both in soft skills working with people and know-how experience, in the specific technical area. These programs fostered by the abundance of needs on the part of the students they serve gives credence to the proclivity that the selection process be revolved around individuals who have mixed skill sets. Noteworthy also is the idea that these art the products they would like to see exiting these institutions, also delineated by the Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (S.C.A.N.S.), individuals with both soft (people) skills and hard (technical subject matter) skills 7). What skills do you believe are necessary in being an instructional leader in an effective School-to-Work program? Alpha I: “Seeing the big picture. Being able to collaborate with teachers on their level, business, and community people bringing it all together. School to Work is more than getting kids jobs. It’s a way of increasing academic achievement. Kids come to school when they like what they do. You have to be a master planner. Connecting the dots is important. Collaborating on another level. You have to see all the pieces.” Beta I: “Knowing your skills, your trade. Not just on the surface but all the specific details. In terms of materials, manufacturing, airplane parts, and working from the ground up. Working on the line and as a plant manager helps in working with a school staff.” Delta I: “Being a teacher in industrial arts requires skills that I use on a regular basis as a principal. I know what it is like to be teaching students from all kinds of backgrounds. I am a good listener and teachers respect administrators who have lots of teaching experience and might even respect them more when they have taught in the same subject area. Students respect me because they know I have taught these subjects before and worked in the real world too.” Item Analysis: The responses to the question posed were varied. Alpha I sees a necessary skill base involving collaboration with all sectors, business, community, and “seeing a big picture” where Beta I and Delta I see their skill set in much more limiting terms, although still considered integral and important in these settings. Alpha I uses a number of vivid metaphors in describing his role as choreographers, master planner, collaborators, one 195 who can see the pieces at the micro level and a real understanding at the macro level of tasks involved and how to connect the dots. 8). What are some of the practices that you as an instructional leader engage in that contributes to the success of this program? Alpha I: “I talk a lot with everyone about what we do. It snowballs. I like teaching teachers about project based learning or integrating curriculum. Curriculum and understanding it at different levels excites me. I see it as necessary. I also like sharing our successes with the community, politicians, and parents. It’s important to listen to employers, community people, kids, and parents. Creating opportunities is an important part of what and why we do it.” Beta I: “I am always reminding our staff about instruction being worked around the real world. Kids hear a lot about the real world but this puts guts to it. That is where it all counts.” Delta I: “I am detail oriented. Making sure materials are stocked, following through with discipline. I talk to students one on one.” Item Analysis: With a focus on specific practices one respondent eluded to the continuum of administrative/managerial maintenance practices to others addressing instructional leadership practices, informing and leading, focusing on instruction. 9). What type of work based learning do the students you serve engage in? Alpha I: “We actually have kids mentored by employers or a result of this mega job fair we do where 1000 + kids take part. Some get internships or they get hired on the spot. They are prepared by our technical teachers about how to interact with people, what jobs might be good ones for them. When they get there, they are ready to talk with employers that can connect with them. We have developed a large group of employers who know what the kids have to offer. That fair is talked about all year by the kids and those others in the community They follow up and then have opportunities to learn on the job.” Beta I: “We have looked at internships, which work for some kids and we have some direct hires come out of it.” We do mock interviews a few times a year.” Delta I: “Some students go to work in non-paid kinds of places. They work along with adults and other young people at those jobs. They get a chance to see what it is like actually on a job, and it works out pretty good for the students and the other employees and the employers.” 196 Item Analysis: Work-based learning is an essential component of STW programs enumerated by all respondents. As the School to Work Opportunities Act (STWOA) of 1994 suggests these activities take many different forms based on the unique needs of the schools and communities that put them into place. Celebrating and talking about the successes that have been realized, helps students make the connection between school and work, an issue addressed in the review of literature. Adding meaning to school by connecting it to work contributes to kids staying in school. 10). What type of connecting activities between the school and the community has been utilized in this process? Alpha I: “The job fair is big. At times we have students take courses off-campus at the JCs. This goes both ways. We take advantage of the community colleges’ classes and based on student need sometime bring the professors on our campus. We also do a lot to integrate coursework offered by proprietary schools like Devry, where kids are bused 1 to 2 periods a day and learn a number of valuable technical skills and soft skills from a technical school. Some of our students because of that experience, apply, attend, and graduate from technical schools. I also do a lot of talking with industry, the city power structure, and many employers and their employees who connect with our kids in all kinds of ways, lots of different activities. I set a goal every year to become involved with a new community group every year knowing it will help kids.” Beta I: “When you say connecting activities, what do you mean? Welding firms, people who work with metals, fabrication come in and talk to our students. We give kids some time with employers and a lot of guest speakers from industry.” Delta I: “People like to know what were doing, so we put out a newsletter and I sit on an advisory board with other people where we talk about what employers want and what we in the schools are doing. We put up job postings for the students to see.” Item Analysis: Connecting activities, also considered an essential component of STW Systems, and outlined in the STWOA with a caveat of site discretion and choice is described by these site-based leaders with varying degrees of participation. Respondents indicate the need for active, aggressive, engaging connecting activities to those considered more passive. Degree is also juxtaposed to the amount or number of different connecting activities by the respondents. 11). What kind of barriers did you/your district encounter in creating a School-to-Work program? 197 Alpha I: “It really comes down to the essence of what school to work is about. Is it about just getting jobs or is it the real magic of having kids make the connection between the skills in the technical area and how it relates to academic achievement. Superintendents want to know how it will increase academic achievement and that it is the bottom line for them. With standards driven systems, you have to get that right first. That is a fact. There is data that shows better post secondary participation, higher grades and other more positive outcomes for kids involved in school. It helps a great deal for work industry to let their needs to be known.” Beta I: “I am not really sure about a certain kind of barrier. We looked at this before I was hired. There is the physical, putting the program in place, hiring but I didn’t really take part in that.” Delta I: “Money always seems to be a barrier whenever there are new programs that are started. It is a long process. There are a lot of things to do in this area. A lot of time is spent justifying what money goes into what. A lot of leg work is involved in preparation.” Item Analysis: The span of responses includes the philosophical orientation surrounding STW programs along with fiscal as well as physical capacity to support them. Alpha I response really focuses on one of the most important issues faced when implementing a curriculum that is seen or perceived as non-academic. Additionally the purpose of school addressed repeatedly in this discourse is an essential part of this discussion. A Nation At Risk (1983) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) focused on increasing academic achievement. The acceptance by many in government, in education at all levels, the community, and parents, may be attributed to the idea that academic achievement can be a byproduct of integrating coursework both vocational and academic as seen as a cohesive not an isolated approach. 12). If you were to implement a School-to-Work program today, what kind of barriers would you encounter? Alpha I: “It always comes down to the idea that School to Work somehow is not increasing academic achievement. More harmful is the idea that School to Work programs are not academic at all. That it is just voc ed revisited in some other form. We have kids in our program that go on to good engineering schools. You overcome barriers by starting with workforce needs, then aligning that with the output of potential quality employees you want to leave our program. Along the way you have engaged teachers and kids and they all find meaning in this.” Beta I: “It seems to me the toughest part is getting the physical space ready, where you have the room for trade work and additional classrooms for other subjects. These programs require a lot of space. Many of the school sites don’t have the amount of space 198 needed even if you operate on the same site as the school that has been there. We always talk about expanding and this is where we get stuck.” Delta I: “Money…money and money. We could do a lot without having to worry about writing the checks. In our school program we can’t have large class sizes because we give students the individual attention they need. That in itself makes it more expensive to run. That is one of the main ideas behind small schools. The district may not do it you know intentionally, but the red and black ink says it all.” Item Analysis: The respondents viewed barriers with different lenses. One respondent viewed physical allocations as critical while another looked at the economic cost of programs. The third focused on debates about the utility of such programs. All saw barriers but they were quite varied. 13). Did you receive District, Central Office support for this program implementation? In what ways was that support/non-support manifested? Alpha I: “We have people in district leadership positions who know how important school to work, preparing kids for life is. We have central staff, who take advantage of Perkins Money and is ahead of the curve in these areas. We have a team of principals, like myself, and directors at the district level that are on the same page. We meet regularly. If I need support for a program activity, even money they are always open. They see the work we do.” Beta I: “The central office for the most part dictated policy in the creation of these programs. Since the programs were started we could always rely on central office to support us in many different ways. Much of that support came directly in the allocation of ADA money and staffing requirements.” Delta I: “I believe the district take lots of pride in the kinds and type of programs that we offer. I am reluctant often to go to the district with a grocery list but at times I am forced to. I know they believe we do good work. We do good work.” Item Analysis: According to respondents district support comes in sundry ways to these programs. Support of programs appears evident from all respondents; however, programs sustainability with a focus on fiscal support from one respondent appears problematic. 14). What were some of the criteria utilized in selecting teachers and support personnel for this program? 199 Alpha I: “We needed and always do need people who are willing to take risks and be open to improving their practice. The teachers who teach academic or technical subjects, and we have some that do both, must be willing to take part in continuous professional development. We are always asking staff to do it better for students. We ask teachers to take part in curriculum development, aligning standards in academics with the technical standards that have been developed recently by the state along with improving what they already do. One project we engaged in recently included CAHSEE Exit Exam preparation that looked at teaching these tested skills in all classes. R.O.P., Business Systems, Construction Technology, Algebra. We needed these skills taught in all classes across the board.” Beta I:” Everyone at this school is picked because the have something special to offer our students. Patience is important. They have to be able to stay after the teaching day, Sometimes work evenings or Saturdays. At this school we have different things going on at different times. I need people I can count on. People that will do extra stuff. If an employer wants to meet with my staff at 6:00 P.M. or we have orientation for new students and their parents, usually in the evening I need people there to talk about what they do.” Delta I:” I have made it clear to everyone interested at working here that they must be up for it. Our students come from a lot of different backgrounds, and meeting them where they are at is not the easiest job. Even our secretaries and custodial staff have to be flexible. Word gets out, what we are looking for and word of mouth seems to bring the right people our way. Sometimes I am shocked by the number of good people we have here. Many have had alternative ed backgrounds or worked in other special type of programs.” Item Analysis: Responses from this cohort show that the unique needs of School to Work (STW) programs calls on the selection of individuals with a great deal of expertise in working with atypical students. The demands placed on these individuals are voluminous where extra time and effort are qualities seen as a premium and often demanded by site instructional leaders. Flexibility appears to be on attribute needed in these types of programs base on the content of the program, the unique needs of these students, and the commitment required. 15). What percentage of your school day is dedicated to managerial tasks? What percentage of your school day is dedicated to the role of instructional leader? Alpha I: “I see instructional leadership as a number one priority. The requirements of our mission place the expectation that I take an active role in guiding our site in instruction. It is not easy to make the connections between technical course work and the state’s standards in academic subject. Recent work by the state of California in the area of 200 creating CTE standards points out these pertinent issues. I do a lot of work with my teaching staff helping to align the state’s standards in both these areas. It is difficult to say what percentage of my school day is dedicated to the role of instructional leader because I spend a lot of time working with community groups, employers, and advisory boards. Sometimes the managerial side of my job is at times suffering because of my work in these areas.” Beta I: “I spend a lot of time keeping on top of managing the site. That is a focus I have always had. When we do professional development I see to it that we bring in people who know how this works. Many our teachers are good at what they do and I am pleased with that.” Delta I: “Like I said before, I am detailed oriented. Our technical teachers have abundant needs when it comes to materials. It is tough to work in a computer class without the appropriate programs and hardware. I am fortunate that I have a support staff that assists me in this process. Managing the site is an important priority.” Item Analysis: The respondent’s responses find alignment with the literature review regarding the ongoing comparing/contrasting between administrative/managerial tasks and the role of instructional leader. The traditional approach and one steeped in a log term historical perspective shows that many individuals view principals as middle level managers. The role of a principal as an instructional leader finds its roots in and can be traced directly to initial reform attempts in the eighties. Any type of reform requires the skill base of an effective instructional leader. Instructional leaders need to be well versed in the philosophical orientation of these programs and sound pedagogy. Implementation of these programs also insists on a knowledge based that includes varied instructional practice based on content and learning styles of students. 16). What are some of the perceived benefits of implementing a School-to-Work? program on the part of a) students, b) teachers, c) parents, d) employers. Alpha I: “The big picture is that this is good for kids, teachers, parents, and employers. For students we have found some substantial links that keep them involved and engaged. They make a connection between school and life after school. Teachers take a great deal of pride in making subject matter meaningful. Employers see us as providing an adequate pipeline of prepared workers. Parents like the idea that kids are better prepared for life after school and also like the idea that their progression in our programs involves career awareness, exploration and employment. The state of California has shown through recent research. The CDE website under CTE have research reports that show how specifically these programs benefit students.” 201 Beta I: “When students first come to our programs they are scattered in seeking out what careers might interest them. The longer they are here the more focused their choices become. Parents like the idea that we may give kids choices that they wouldn’t have had. Parents always want to know where their kids are going to end up. We help with this.” Delta I: “We have many kids who come from many different backgrounds and work ethic has not always been stable in their lives. We keep them interested in school and start to get them interested in what’s down the road. Employers are always interested in the products that they deal in whether it be the hard goods or the skills that people bring to their jobs.” Item Analysis: It becomes apparent that many site instructional leaders are skilled in recognizing the benefits of these programs. The academic literature surrounding STW programs finds congruence with these responses that many individuals are positively impacted by the implementation of these programs. The cyclical nature of reform shows the pendulum in a much different position when vocational education was first debated in the 19 Century. Buy in from all constituents is essential if funding sources are to remain th constant and have programs expand. 17). What advice would you give to urban school districts investigating implementing a School-to-Work program? Alpha I: “Many urban school districts face the same problems. Dropouts, poor academic performance, deleterious outcomes for students exiting our urban schools. It is important to recognize that STW may not have all the answers but it is proven to be a fundamental starting point for schools to be reformed and to do a better job of educating students. It is also important to inform school leaders that STW is really about increasing academic achievement.” Beta I: “It is important that you look and see what is out there. Many urban kinds of schools are taking the opportunity to create programs like this. It is not easy.” Delta I: “Flexibility is a key word. Start with what you have and go from there. Industry needs to take a part. You need to get parents involved.” Item Analysis: The respondents show a large chasm of breadth and depth. The literature has addressed many of the complicated issues in creating STW programs. Individuals in urban districts embarking in this implementation process need to have thorough understanding of what STW is and is not. They must also continue to keep the focus on vocational education, STW programs or in current vernacular CTE as a means of keeping young people engaged in learning, completing high school, increasing academic achievement, attending post-secondary training, and becoming lifelong learners. Many of 202 these positive outcomes are cited in the academic literature with the implementation of these types of programs. 203 Appendix B: Central Office Interview Protocol (C.O.I.P.) 1). How long have you been working in school administration? 2). What various positions have you held in school administration? 3). What other positions have you held in the field of education? 4). Why were you selected as a central office administrator and asked to be involved in the implementation of a School-to-Work program? 5). What barriers did you/your district face in implementing a School-to-Work program? 6). If you were to implement a School-to-Work program today, what barriers would you encounter? 7). What skills, knowledge base, and practices on the part of site-based instructional leaders do you feel contribute to implementation and leading effective School-to-Work programs? 8). What do you believe are some of the criteria that should be utilized in selecting a site-based instructional leader for a School-to-Work program? 9). What were some of the necessary steps in implementing a School-to-Work program? 10). Why do you believe School-to-Work programs are particularly beneficial to urban school districts? 11). What are some of the perceived benefits on the part of a) students, b) teachers? c) parents, d) employers. 204 12). What advice would you give to urban school districts investigating implementing a School-to-Work program? 205 II a. Responses of Central Office Administrators from Administration of Central Office Interview Protocol ( C.O.I.P.) 1). How long have you been working in school administration? Alpha II: “I have been involved in administration in some form or another for twenty years.” Beta II: “Five years.” Delta II: “I have been doing this job for two years. I got a tap on the shoulder when I was teaching computer science in adult ed and got a waiver to teach two Algebra sections.” Gamma II: “I have been in school admin for seventeen years.” Item Analysis: The experiential tenure in school administration is varied significantly ranging from five to twenty years. 2). What various positions have you held in school administration? Alpha II: “I was a school principal in a comprehensive setting and have been in school-to- career for the last five years. I also was a vice principal.” Beta II: “I have been an adult education principal, a teacher leader in an adult education program and now a career and technical preparation director at the district level.” Delta II: “This is the job I love. I am a Director / K-12 School to Career. I was at a site as an administrator in adult ed.” Gamma II: “I have been a program manager for ten years dealing with at risk students and adult education.” Item Analysis: The responses indicate a wide variety of backgrounds in various forms of school administration. It is these wide range of experiences that school districts count on that are instrumental in creating new programs and looking at different perspectives. That can be seen as strength in the risk taking involved in new program development and implementation. Working as an administrator in adult education finds some of the same issues that need to be addressed. Many of those attending are doing so because of not being successfully economically or socially. Job readiness deficits on the part of adults are not different than the ones we see missing from young people’s work readiness 206 repertoire. Gamma III with his additional experience of working with kids at risk makes this a great leader, client match. 3). What other positions have you held in the field of education? Alpha II: “I was a school counselor, a career counselor, and always interested in the unique needs of students.” Beta II: “I am a former special education teacher, a voc ed teacher and a teacher on special assignment at the School to Work office.” Delta II: “This education is a second career for me. I taught computer science and some math classes I was comfortable with. I spent years with Texaco in senior management.” Gamma II: “I worked in adult ed with students at risk as a teacher and as a program manager in federally funded programs.” Item Analysis: The respondents indicated that many of them have a variety of different experiences in the field of education. These varied experiences make them a good fit and are viewed as valuable attributes for STW program development and management at the district level. Implementing a STW Program also requires that central office staff have the support of the instructional leaders doing much of the frontline leading. It is quite clear that there are positive benefits to be garnered by the widespread reflective tasks that were involved. Having Beta II and Delta II bringing real live work environments coupled with career and technical education and long-term leadership from industry indicates a set of skill that could be utilized in their program on a regular basis. 4). Why were you selected as a central office administrator and asked to be involved in the implementation of a School-to-Work program? Alpha II: “I believe it was my work in a number of different settings and my commitment to working with students in great need that contributed to my selection.” Beta II: “I have a history in career and technical education. My background in the early 90,s was in voc ed. and the focus was on academics and I went on to other things. Voc. programs were being shut down. Then I came back. It was my passion. It was not a wise career move some people said. It was what I wanted to do.” Delta II: A few years ago the district needed to be involved in school reform. An initial plan was presented to Bill Gates’ Dad, Bill and Melinda Gates They liked the plan well enough to continue a substantial support of the program. We were dealing with state 207 mandates and directives. My experience with Texaco that went back decades was a factor. I had been there and done that. High-level management in the private sector. I was, at the grass roots level, a successful teacher. Administrators come and go. They were pleased that any kid like myself could come in and teach and then recognized that I could do other things. I had retired, got cancer and wanted to give back.” Gamma II: “I was selected because I came up through the ranks in the administration of federal programs for students at risk and others.” Item Analysis: The respondents’ responses indicated that all had traveled circuitous paths to this district level leadership position. The sundry positions within and outside of the field of education provided an experiential base that could serve districts well in this undertaking. 5). What barriers did you/your district face in implementing a School-to-Work program? Alpha II: “It has to be systematic. Start with handling objections. Sometimes ignore objections. Think through the process. Standards driven urban schools have to go through the process of gathering input. If you don’t it could be a problem. Barriers come in all shapes and sizes. Be proactive.” Beta II: “Making it work, we face barriers in making it work to become part of a systemic system. Many administrators have problems funding career and Technical Education. Money is one kind of support. There are other ways to support these programs. We have to sell other leaders in schools on this kind of program. In 2001 there were 33 sections of R.O.P. offerings. Now we have 125 sections serving 5000 kids. It is now getting easier. We don’t have to sell it as hard. Principals now see more ADA money in their back pockets and they would like to see more. These kids attend these programs because they find meaning. They come everyday.” Delta II: “Sometimes the biggest barriers are the A-G requirements. Some districts don’t believe in the arts or in other technical skills. One barrier we face is to make this work to become part of the systemic program. We need more participation from post secondary schools, junior colleges. We need industry on our side.” Gamma II: “If individuals have a superficial understanding of STW it will not work. There is pressure on urban districts and areas to focus on academics. You need to be involved in gospel spreading. Support academic and vocational learning together as one system, not separate systems. Linking business and education has always been difficult and it will continue to be. We are getting better. School leadership itself can be a barrier. You have to be an advocate with adequate communication skills.” 208 Item Analysis: The respondents indicate a recurring theme regarding the implementation process. Barriers include the preoccupation of urban schools and their communities with a standards based approach in curing the ills of urban districts (drop-out, poor academic achievement, and poor lifetime outcomes). The A-G requirements are highlighted and there is the concern that those placing barriers including leadership and industry have shallow understanding of STW systems. The approach needs to be the employment of systemic system with a link between academics and technical subject matter learning. The growth eluded to by Beta II shows a clear progression of expansion and growth of these programs. 6). If you were to implement a School-to-Work program today, what barriers would you encounter? Alpha II: “Many of the barriers were in the form of legislative mandates. No child left behind. A focus on AYP and other state measures. These mandates are not necessarily good for kids. STW may help shed insight on how to see the light at the end of the tunnel, not just to get jobs but get a way to educate kids to get them interested in college or further education. The current system disconnects kids from the system who don’t see any relevance to the real world in school.” Beta II: “Accountability is big. But there is evidence by Mitchell out of U.C. Riverside that shows more post-secondary participation when kids are in School to Work programs. They say if I want to drive a BMW I need to think about the need for more education. Community college, technical schools or 4-year colleges. They say they see the need for it. We need to have others school leaders, superintendents, politicians to see the importance. Employers see how important it is.” Delta II: “The biggest barrier is the disagreement over how to and in what ways do we improve urban schools.” Gamma II: “The barriers would be the same. They haven’t changed the inability to link school with work, academics with vocational learning. Sometime, we in education are our worst enemy.” Item Analysis: The respondents reiterate that many in the playing field, those in education and the community, put the barriers in place and that the barriers still remain the same. The standards focus and lack of understanding of STW conspire in unison to present barriers in implementation. One longstanding philosophical barrier is the idea that there is a pejorative view of curriculums perceived as non-academic. This presents a strong case for continued research that examines efficacy of such programs and the persistent effort to integrate school and work, school and work based learning and vocational and academic subject matter. This debate that looks at the opposing viewpoints of academics 209 versus C.T.E., vocational education or STW is one that successful implementers have addressed. They have argued successfully that STW, vocational education, or CTE programs can increase academic achievement. It is through this vehicle that academic subject matter is mastered. 7). What skills, knowledge base, and practices on the part of site-based instructional leaders do you feel contribute to implementation and leading effective School-to-Work programs? Alpha II: “The rational for STW need implementation is key. Site instructional leaders are in their communities and they to know the concerns that people have. This job as principal in this kind of program is not easy. You have to be in the community working with everyone to make this work. The principal has to be the point person in instruction making connections, links between school and work, tech classes and academics, knowing how it is done. Implementing is one thing, following through is another.” Beta II: “Site instructional leaders need to have extensive experience teaching. They need to have experience outside of the classroom in the real world. They need to be able to coordinate when and how to put a meaningful curriculum in place. The connecting activities are the hardest and most difficult to get right.” Delta II: “They need to have knowledge of teaching technical skills and soft skills. They should also have experience outside of education. They should have an awareness of what industry needs. They should have a wide range of work experiences and a knowledge of what it means to prepare a kid to go to work.” Gamma II: “Principals need to have worked outside in business and in industry. They have to have a collaborative mind set and be excited about partnerships in the community. They have to be skilled in instructional leadership, class management, and bridging and integrating academic disciplines with tech courses. They have to be able to integrate work and school. It is also important to contextualize subject matter.” Item Analysis: Their responses indicate there is a protuberant need for individuals who are schooled and well versed in the teaching and learning process as well as having meaningful, lengthy experience outside of education. In addition these individuals must have the capacity to collaborate with employers defections and meaningful STW linkages. Beta II asserts the need for instructors to have extensive teaching experience linked to the real world. Delta II and Gamma II believe strongly that administrators need to have the capacity to link workplace needs to match to skills students exit with. 210 8). What do you believe are some of the criteria that should be utilized in selecting a site-based instructional leader for a School-to-Work program? Alpha II: “It starts with them knowing pedagogy. They have to have a strong background as a real instructional leader. I want my principals to be well versed on the link between tech courses and the fundamentals in the teaching of all subject matter and how to get it across to teachers and the people we serve, the students. You have to know a lot about a lot.” Beta II: “These individuals must have experience other than teaching in their background. It must be someone who has worked their way through school as a teacher and in other positions. Experience in a number of different fields is helpful.” Delta II: “The criteria in selection of site based leaders should include individuals that have four year degrees in some other areas that have a strong industry background, some experience with teaching at some level. They have got to be involved. They have to be willing to work with students who have no sign of willingness to dream….to take risks. You have to have enough passion to have your heart broke and understand quickly where kids come from. Kids are live widgets. Teaching is one of the hardest things I have ever done. Principals have to realize this.” Gamma II: “They should be able to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of life outside of the classroom. They should have worked outside in the business community and be able to reflect on that experience.” Item Analysis: The selection of individuals as site leaders shows that the respondents found agreement with response #7 that individuals should be chosen on the basis that they have the skills set of being knowledgeable in the teaching of subject matter and with experience outside of education. Meaningfulness can be added to the instruction when a site leader is selected that knows the subject matter, has strong ties to the industry. Delta II places a premium on involvement with kids and passion. He wistfully adds, “You have to have your heart broke and understand quickly where kids come from”. 9). What were some of the necessary steps in implementing a School-to-Work program? Alpha II: “It is necessary to look at this process from a number of different perspectives. It is important to see what is out there and what works. There are a number of studies that look at School to Work, small learning communities, and career academies, based on the CTE frameworks at the state level. If you rush this process it can be counterproductive. You need to look at your individual community needs. What opportunities are there for employment and in what specific area? You have to also ask why are you doing it. Do 211 you have buy in from employers, community and policymakers? Implementation process shouldn’t begin until after you have answered the questions.” Beta II: “You have to go at it systematically. Implementation should look at the business community first. Then the local community workforce investment boards. Look closely at workforce development needs. Working with employers first and their needs is an important step. Before you invest in $12,000.00 to identify embedded math standards in coursework. Do your homework first. Who needs these kids with these skills.” Delta II: “What is important is what is the critical mass of skilled workers that your community needs? What are the areas of need? Line technology, metallurgists? Health care? What is it? That will drive course offering.” Gamma II: “You have to be a cultural change agent and be able to solicit industry needs. You have to be skilled in creating community linkages and have operational vigilance, the ability to monitor program progression, and follow through or the program will not flourish.” Item Analysis: The congruent responses indicate that industry needs should be a starting point for the direction and subsequent implementation. One respondent points to looking at what is out there and what is working. Alpha II cites the importance that a good starting point needs to be centered on what works, what is talked about in the literature surround efficacy of these programs. Secondly, he believes that industry and community needs are essential in determining what to do. Lastly he stresses the importance of buy in from employers, community, and industry. Beta II believes that knowing what the local workforce needs are is part of the systemic process. Delta II finds agreement where he explains the importance of knowing what skilled workers are needed in your community. Gamma II as well stresses the notion that a knowledge base of community needs cannot be understated. 10). Why do you believe School-to-Work programs are particularly beneficial to urban school districts? Alpha II: “Our urban districts face tremendous odds in graduating kids. The demographics show that our cities are where our diverse learners are. Poverty is rampant in our cities. How many are poor in the suburbs? Many of the STW programs created in the state of California are in our cities. This is where help is needed the most.” Beta II: “It’s beneficial to urban districts because most students do not go on to other education. They stop learning even if they are in school, attending our high schools. It puts kids in urban areas in work based learning and helps them connect to the real world, 212 not just sitting in algebra or geometry choosing to do something with their life rather than more of the same.” Delta II: “It is important that we build understanding around the capability of what students can do. If I can’t get kids to believe how good they are and they are just junkyard dogs, that creates pain for everyone in the community. It is particularly beneficial to parents and kids in urban areas because they are both beaten up and afraid of the system.” Gamma II: “It is important and critical for all kids to connect to the world of work but this is an area where we have fallen short for kids in urban districts.” Item Analysis: It was patently obvious to the interviewees that these urban areas are where innovative programs are needed the most. A theme weaved throughout this research, with large numbers of diverse students, academic performance deficits, achievement gaps, high dropout rates, and disconnectivity between school and work, academic, and vocational subject matter indicates that our urban schools have an abundance of needs. In our urban school, kids believe education is done to them and not for them. 11). What are some of the perceived benefits on the part of a) students, b) teachers, c) parents, d) employers? Alpha II: “It may not change every outcome that we see for everyone but kids become excited about school and work. Parents simply want o see kids being productive.” Beta II: “It benefits everybody. Students have the benefits of real world applications of what they learn in schools. Placing academics into practicable applications, Teachers have their opportunity to put the coursework in an understandable forum. There is data that shows the effectiveness of these programs. The State Superintendent of Public Instruction has spearheaded Career and Technical Education in the state. Jack O’Connell takes this issue very seriously. He is making this a major objective for the CDE.” Delta II: “STW gets kids to see success. It helps kids to build trust around people who don’t look like they do. It allows students to become engaged. Parents also get to see success.” Gamma II: “It helps students to succeed and to stay in school. Employers get to benefit from a more prepared work force. Higher teacher retention appears to be a byproduct also.” Item Analysis: Many of the respondents have provided a long list of positive outcomes for particularly students and employers. Parents are often skeptical about the work done 213 in schools. This allows for the painting of a different portrait. When examining the list of those it positively impacts, the constituents, one concludes that it includes many of the same people and groups who historically have been confronting schools to change. These include parents, politicians, particularly at the state level, industry and most importantly the students. Another key point of the discussion is that individuals view positively the purpose of school that mimics the common man approach: Does it make sense? Does it impact a lot of people? Is it good for kids? 12). What advice would you give to urban school districts investigating implementing a School-to-Work program? Alpha II: “Take a look at work force needs in your local area. Examine what student performance currently looks like. Look at options that other districts have employed. Use their knowledge and experience in this area.” Beta II: ”We have done some cutting edge work in this area. We have hired people from private industry who work for the district who have a great deal of experience in their field and placed them in an entrepreneurial role. They have expertise, which is well respected and has taken us a long way in the process. You have to get everyone on board. We have gotten private industry, parents, community and the political sector take and play a role and take ownership for these programs.” Delta II: “Look at urban students needs. The need for academic reform and the business needs all at one time. Look at community perceptions. These are all important.” Gamma II: “Look closely at your community and your students. Be motivated by keeping kids in school. Be flexible and open to feedback from others involved in this process.” Item Analysis: The recommendations are quite clear that a preliminary investigation in this area should look at individual community needs and guiding programs that will create better outcomes for students. Learn from other successes and also from their mistakes. Seek counsel from other urban districts that have implemented STW programs. The respondents expressed explicitly the need for knowing first hand what the workforce needs are. Alpha II places importance on what current student performance looks like. One tenant weaved throughout arguments for implementation and expansion of vocational education, STW, and CTE is the often-framed notion that there is a mismatch between what the skill base exists and what skill base does industry need? The model used exclusively Beta II’s district hires individuals from private industry and places them in entrepreneurial role where collaboration is essential. Delta II places a focus on urban school needs including the need to reform school and the role business needs play in the equation. Delta II places the focus and emphasis on the community and the kids school serve. Another theme weaved throughout the academic literature is that these programs 214 keeps kids in schools and that educators need to be motivated by this. The dictates in this area are quite clear. 215 Appendix C: Survey of Instructional Leaders (S.I.L.) 1). Sex M___ F____ 2). Experience in Education: Number of Years Paraprofessional ___________________ Teacher ___________________ Counselor ___________________ Administrator ___________________ Administrator in a School-to-Work program ___________________ 3). Experience outside of Education: Career Field Position Held Number of Years __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ 4). Educational Background: Highest Degree Earned Bachelor Degree ___________________ Master Degree ___________________ Post Master Credits ___________________ Earned Doctorate ___________________ 5). Program Description: a. Size of Program Number of students _____ Number of faculty _____ 216 b. School within a school Yes______ No ______ c. Academy model utilized Yes______ No ______ Types of Academies: _________________________ ____________________________ _________________________ ____________________________ _________________________ ____________________________ _________________________ ____________________________ _________________________ ____________________________ _________________________ ____________________________ d. Population served: % of student population who speak a first language other than English ________ % of student population that meet diverse criteria (students other than Anglo) _______ % of student population identified who meet any one of the Federal Handicapping Conditions (FHC) ________ 6). Plant Configurations: a. Housed within a traditional school site. Yes _____ No _____ b. Physical plant specifically created for the program. Yes _____ No _____ c. Use of alternative sites (store front location, co-located with specific industry). Specify: ________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ 217

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate School-to-Work programs in an attempt to better understand these programs and how they were implemented. Instructional leaders and central office administrators in School-to-Work programs in urban settings in the state of California participated in this study.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The effects of mentoring on building and sustaning effective leadership practice of an urban school administrator

PDF

Building and sustaining effective school leadership through principal mentoring in an urban school context

PDF

Preparing leaders for the urban school context: a case study analysis for effective leadership

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing high-poverty urban schools

PDF

Districtwide instructional improvement: a case study of a high school in the Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

Student engagement in a high-performing urban high school: a case study

PDF

An exploration of principal self-efficacy beliefs about transformational leadership behaviors

PDF

Resource allocation strategies and educational adequacy: Case studies of school level resource use in California middle schools

PDF

An exploration of leadership capacity building and effective principal practices

PDF

Gender equity and Cambodian high school students in a large urban school district: perspectives from administrators, teachers, and students

PDF

Student engagement in high performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

The implementation of online learning for ESL programs: factors and perspectives

PDF

Resource allocation in successful schools: case studies of California elementary schools

PDF

Principal leadership practice: the achieving principal coaching initiative

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student learning: case studies of California schools

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of an urban school

PDF

The political economy of California school district parcel tax elections

PDF

Student engagement in high-performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

A new era of leadership: preparing leaders for urban schools & the 21st century

PDF

Student engagement in a high performing urban high school: a case study

Asset Metadata

Creator Lorah, Rand James (author)

Core Title School-to-work programs in urban districts in the state of California: a leadership perspective

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 08/13/2009

Defense Date 03/16/2009

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,postsecondary education,School,school change,school reform,transition,Urban Education,Work

Place Name California (states)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), Gothold, Stuart E. (committee member), Hentschke, Guilbert C. (committee member)

Creator Email lorah@usc.edu,rlorah@sandi.net

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2565

Unique identifier UC1197697

Identifier etd-Lorah-3157 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-260830 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2565 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Lorah-3157.pdf

Dmrecord 260830

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Lorah, Rand James

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu