University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The role of superintendents and district administrators in developing career technical education programs to assist students in becoming college‐ and career‐ready

(USC Thesis Other)

The role of superintendents and district administrators in developing career technical education programs to assist students in becoming college‐ and career‐ready

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

THE ROLE OF SUPERINTENDENTS AND DISTRICT ADMINISTRATORS IN
DEVELOPING CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS TO ASSIST STUDENTS
IN BECOMING COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY

by

Allan Tyner

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2018

Copyright 2018 Allan Tyner

2

THE ROLE OF DISTRICT ADMINISTRATORS IN DEVELOPING CAREER TECHNICAL
EDUCATION PROGRAMS TO ASSIST STUDENTS IN BECOMING COLLEGE-
AND CAREER-READY
by
Allan Tyner

A Dissertation Presented

in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

2018

APPROVED:

___________________________________
Pedro Garcia, Ed.D.
Committee Co-Chair

____________________________________
Rudy M. Castruita, Ed.D.
Committee Co-Chair

_____________________________________
John A. Roach, Ed.D.
Committee Member
3

Preface
Some of the chapters of this dissertation were coauthored and have been identified as
such. While jointly authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a
collaborative effort is reflective of real-world practices. To meet their objective of developing
highly skilled practitioners equipped to take on real-world challenges, the USC Graduate School
and the USC Rossier School of Education have permitted our inquiry team to carry out this
shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project with two other doctoral candidates,
Mayra Helguera (2018) and Concepcion Quintero (2018). We three doctoral students set out to
identify the role of district administrators in developing, implementing, and supporting Career
Technical Education programs. However, the subject was too large for a single dissertation. As
a result, the three dissertations produced by our inquiry team collectively address the roles of
district administrators.

4

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to better understand the role of district administrators, especially
superintendents, in developing Career Technical Education Programs so that students graduate
college- and career-ready. More specifically, this study intended to determine: 1) the role of
district administrators in developing Career Technical Education programs to support college-
and career-readiness, 2) what Career Technical Education programs districts have supported for
implementation, 3) what resources districts allocated to support Career Technical Education
programs, and 4) what types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be
effective in improving college- and career-readiness. This study used a mixed-methods
approach. Quantitative data was collected from 28 surveys of district administrators and
superintendents. Five interviews with superintendents provided the qualitative data for the study.
Through the process of triangulation, the study’s findings revealed that the role of district
administrators and superintendents in the development, implementation, and support of CTE
programs includes developing a vision, collecting data, identifying resources, and allocating
them appropriately, and providing continuing support to all sites within their district. This study
adds to current literature on effective CTE programs that improve college- and career-readiness.
The findings can be used by LEAs to improve students’ college- and career-readiness and
develop CTE programs that meet their students’ needs. Furthermore, the research findings can
be used to determine CTE programs that have been effective in developing students that are
college- and career-ready.

5

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank the faculty at the University of Southern California, Rossier School
of Education for teaching me the skills to complete this program as well as challenging me to
work harder to think outside the box when dealing with real-life educational problems. A special
thanks to my dissertation chairs, Dr. Garcia and Dr. Castruita for their guidance and support
throughout the writing process. Thank you for providing me with clear expectations and specific
feedback as well as pushing me along when I needed it. It was an honor to work with
exceptional educational leaders during the dissertation process. I would also like to thank
Dr. Roach for serving on our committee and providing additional guidance. My growth as an
educational leader is a direct result of the support that I received from these three gentlemen.
Thanks to all the district administrators and superintendents that participated in this
study. I appreciate the time you spent completing surveys and participating in interviews. You
all are extremely busy people and I truly appreciate you taking time out of your days to be a part
of my research.
I would like to thank my writing partners for supporting me along this journey. Both of
you have had a tremendous impact on my life both personally and professionally. It seems so
long ago that we proclaimed, “We’re almost doctors!” but somehow, we fought through the
tough times and got it done. Thanks for pushing me when I needed to be pushed and listening
when you needed to be pushed. You are great people and great leaders who I look forward to
working with in the future.
I could not have finished this program and dissertation without the support of my family.
Thanks for understanding when I had to be away and handling things that needed to be done.
Thank you for all the sacrifices that were made.
6

Table of Contents
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .................................................................................10
Introduction ............................................................................................................10
Background of the Problem ...................................................................................11
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................13
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................14
Research Questions ................................................................................................14
Importance of the Study .........................................................................................15
Assumptions ...........................................................................................................15
Limitations .............................................................................................................16
Delimitations ..........................................................................................................16
Definitions of Terms ..............................................................................................16
Organization of the Study ......................................................................................18
Chapter Two: Literature Review .......................................................................................19
Introduction to the Topic .......................................................................................19
The Relationship between CTE and College- and Career-Readiness ....................26
Allocation of Funding Resources...........................................................................38
Conclusion .............................................................................................................44
Chapter Three: Methodology ............................................................................................46
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................46
Research Questions ................................................................................................46
Study Methods .......................................................................................................47
Sample and Population ..........................................................................................47
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................48
Data Collection ......................................................................................................48
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................49
Summary ................................................................................................................49
Chapter Four: Research and Discussion ............................................................................51
Introduction ............................................................................................................51
Response Rates ......................................................................................................52
Demographic Data .................................................................................................53
Research Question One ..........................................................................................55
Research Question Two .........................................................................................60
Research Question Three .......................................................................................66
Research Question Four .........................................................................................72
Discussion ..............................................................................................................78
Chapter Five: Conclusions .................................................................................................82
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................82
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................83
Research Questions ................................................................................................83
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................84
Implications............................................................................................................88
Limitations .............................................................................................................88
Recommendations for Future Study ......................................................................89
Conclusion .............................................................................................................89
7

References ..........................................................................................................................91
Appendix A: Survey and Interview Questions Pertaining to the Research Questions ......99
Appendix B: Participant Letter ........................................................................................102
Appendix C: Survey Questions for District Administrators (Quantitative).....................103
Appendix D: Interview Questions for District Administrators (Qualitative) ..................104

8

List of Tables
Table 1. Quantitative Survey: Response Rate....................................................................52
Table 2. Qualitative Interview: Superintendents Demographic Data ................................53
Table 3. Demographics of Superintendents’ Districts .......................................................54
Table 4. District Administrators and their Role in the Development,
Implementation and Support of CTE Programs...................................................57
Table. 5. Survey Questions Related to Selection of Career Technical Education
Programs for Implementation .............................................................................62
Table 6. Resources Districts Allocate to Support Career Technical Education
Programs ..............................................................................................................68
Table 7. Areas that Provide Data to Determine Effectiveness of CTE Programs .............74

9

List of Figures
Figure 1: Career Technical Education Anchor Standards ..................................................29
Figure 2: P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning ........................................................32
Figure 3: Eight State Priorities and Their Indicators .........................................................43

10

CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Authors: Mayra Helguera, Concepcion Quintero, and Allan Tyner
1

Introduction
Preparing students to be college- and career-ready is a complex process that requires
instruction in academic, technical, and employability/soft skills. The shift in education from the
California Content Standards that were implemented in 1997 to the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) that were enacted in 2010 came as a result of colleges, universities, and the
industry sector reporting that high school students were not graduating with the necessary skills
to be successful in higher education institutions or careers (Kendall, 2011). Common Core State
Standards included a clear emphasis on graduating students that were both college- and career-
ready. This shift has resulted in an increased demand for programs that incorporate teaching of
the academic, technical, and employability/soft skills identified in order to be college- and
career-ready.
Career Technical Education (CTE) programs are being used by many school districts as a
means to teach college- and career-readiness skills. However, many Career Technical Education
Programs must be further developed to meet the rigor of college preparatory coursework while
simultaneously including employability/soft skills to make students college- and career-ready. In
order to do so, district administrators must allocate resources for these programs and evaluate the
effectiveness so that informed decisions can be made moving forward. It is imperative that the
resources are allocated according to the Local Education Agency’s (LEA) Local Control
Accountability Plan (LCAP) in alignment with the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF)
requirements set forth in the state of California.

1
Chapters One, Two, and Three were jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting a team approach to this project.
The authors are listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by those listed.
11

Background of the Problem
As our society changes, the demand for certain academic and technical skills has
decreased while there has been an increase in demand for others, including employability/soft
skills. Federal funding for vocational education started in 1917 with the passage of the Smith-
Hughes Act which focused primarily on agriculture. The focus of vocational education changed
in 1984 with the passing of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act. At that time,
vocational education was comprised of low-level courses, job training, and electives (Brand,
Valent, & Browning, 2013). Thus, a negative stigma was developed and at times vocational
education programs turned into dumping grounds for students who were deemed incapable of
succeeding academically.
In the state of California, academic content standards were implemented in 1997 and
were designed to encourage the highest achievement of every student by defining the knowledge,
concepts, and skills they should acquire at each grade level (California Department of Education,
2017). The content standards drove instruction in public schools and defined the content that
would be included in annual statewide standards-based assessments. As a result, colleges,
universities, and the industry sector reported that students were not graduating from high school
with the adequate skills needed for success in college and careers (Kendall, 2011).
The 2006 reauthorization of the Perkins Act renamed it as the Carl D. Perkins Career
and Technical Education Act. The Perkins Act was reframed to address the need for both
academic and technical skills required for success in college and the workforce. This reframing
was supported by research in college- and career-readiness which indicated that a college- and
career-ready student must have content knowledge, strategies, skills, and techniques (Conley,
2014).
12

Conley (2014) defined success as the ability to complete entry-level courses at a level
that is sufficient to move onto the next courses in the students’ chosen field. Each student may
need different knowledge and skills to be college- and career-ready (Conley, 2014). A different
study conducted in 2011 identified communication, decision making/problem solving, self-
management, teamwork, professionalism, leadership, and experience as valuable soft skills that
make one employable and ready for the 21st century (DiBenedetto & Myers, 2016).
College- and career-readiness skills have been incorporated into Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) with the goal of defining the knowledge and skills students should achieve in
order to graduate with the ability to succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing academic college
courses, and in workforce training courses (Conley, Drummond, de Gonzalez, Rooseboom, &
Stout, 2011). The new standards place less emphasis on memorizing facts and focus more on the
explicit teaching of collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical thinking skills. Jobs in
the current economy require different knowledge and skills from those in the past (Conley,
2014). This new economy requires nearly everyone entering the workforce to have at least some
post-secondary education, not necessarily a typical four-year degree (Conley, 2014). College
admission requirements are very clear for students pursuing four-year degrees. Students take
part in rigorous academic coursework in high school to prepare them to succeed in the required
college courses. However, there are students who will pursue careers that require technical
training, which is different from a four-year degree and as such have different admission
requirements.
In the past, vocational education was offered for students looking to go into technical
fields. Nevertheless, the vocational education programs did not include rigorous academic
coursework in addition to technical training. Career and Technical Education (CTE) is an
13

educational strategy designed to provide students with the academic, technical, and
employability/soft skills and knowledge to pursue postsecondary training. Students participating
in CTE courses will enter their fields prepared for ongoing learning as CTE includes
academically rigorous, integrated, and sequenced programs of study that align with and lead to
postsecondary education (Brand et al., 2013).
Statement of the Problem
The problem is that high school students are not graduating with college- and career-
readiness skills. According to the California Department of Education (CDE, 2016b), only
43.4% of graduates during the 2014-2015 school year completed all coursework required for
University of California and/or California State University admission. This coursework is
commonly referred to as A-G requirements and refers to the classes that make students eligible
for admission to University of California and California State University schools. The
requirements include three years of college-preparatory social science, four years of college-
preparatory English, three years of college-preparatory math, two years of a laboratory science,
two years of a foreign language, one year of a visual and performing art, and one year of a
college-preparatory elective (Regents of the University of California, 2015). Additionally, in
regard to career readiness, research has shown that high school graduates have not consistently
met standards set by employers in the areas of attendance, teamwork, and work habits (Bangser,
2008).
In order to develop effective Career Technical Education programs to address college-
and career-readiness, resources must be allocated to the development of successful Career
Technical Education programs. With the introduction of the Local Control Funding Formula
(LCFF), districts have greater discretion in how they allocate their resources. While their
14

spending must fall into one of eight categories and align with the Local Education Agency’s
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), districts can develop interventions geared to their
district’s specific needs. It is imperative that resources are allocated in a manner that is aligned
with effective college- and career-readiness programs that have proven effective and line up with
student needs.
Purpose of the Study
This study sought to examine the role of district administrators in allocating resources
and developing effective Career Technical Education (CTE) programs. This study also analyzed
the resources allocated by districts to support the implementation of CTE programs to improve
college- and career-readiness. Convenience/purposeful sampling was used for the study. It was
conducted using a mixed-methods approach including qualitative and quantitative methods.
Qualitative information was collected through interviews and quantitative data was comprised of
a Likert-style survey.
Research Questions
This study will concentrate on the following research questions:
1. What is the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education
programs to support college- and career-readiness?
2. What Career Technical Education programs have districts supported for implementation?
3. What resources do districts allocate to support Career Technical Education programs?
4. What types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in
improving college- and career-readiness?
This study was conducted from a critical research perspective. The goal in critical
inquiry is to critique and challenge, and to transform and empower. Through critical inquiry, this
15

study sought to explain how district administrators can be instrumental to the development of
Career Technical Education courses. It challenges Local Education Agencies to transform the
learning environment for students and empower them to be college- and career-ready (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2015).
Importance of the Study
By examining the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical
Education programs, this study provides information that facilitates and supports the
implementation of Career Technical Education programs. The findings can be used by Local
Educational Agencies seeking to improve student achievement and expand opportunities for
students to develop college- and career-readiness skills. Information obtained through this study
can also assist district administrators in determining allocation of resources and developing
support systems for their site personnel. Furthermore, this study identifies programs that have
shown to be effective in preparing students for real world settings and making them college- and
career-ready.
Assumptions
This study assumed the following:
1. District administration is imperative in the implementation of new programs and the
development of existing ones.
2. College- and career-readiness is a priority for participating districts.
3. The district has a vision and action plan that includes college- and career-readiness and is
shared amongst the organization and all of its stakeholders.

16

Limitations
This study included the following limitations:
1. There was a limited amount of time allotted for this study.
2. The number of school districts offering Career Technical Education programs and their
geographic location limited access for the researchers.
3. The ability to gain access to district administrators to collect information.
4. The ability and/or willingness of district administrators to provide accurate responses.
Delimitations
The delimitations of this study are:
1. Data collected from district administrators was limited to a small number.
2. Only perspectives of district administrators were captured during the data collection
process.
Definition of Terms
• A-G Requirements: The coursework that high school students must take in order to make
them eligible for admission to the University of California and California State
University systems.
• Academic Skills: A collection of skills that students need in order to learn and succeed at
a university, including study habits, critical thinking, reading proficiency, written
communication, analytical thinking, problem solving, and time management.
• American College Test (ACT): A nationally administered standardized assessment used
by most colleges and universities for admissions purposes.
• Career Readiness: Having the academic skills, employability skills, and technical skills
needed to perform job duties.
17

• Career Technical Education (CTE): Courses that provide students with challenging
academic, technical, and employability/soft skills and knowledge they need to prepare for
further education and for careers in emerging and established professions.
• Career Technical Education Pathway: Coherent, planned sequence of career technical
education courses along with academic courses that detail the knowledge and technical
skills students need in order to succeed in a specific career area.
• College Readiness: Students have the skills necessary to succeed in college.
• College- and Career-Readiness: High school graduates have the academic, technical, and
soft skills necessary to qualify for and succeed in postsecondary education and/or job
training.
• Common Core State Standards (CCSS): Education initiative in the United States that
details what students in the K-12 system should know in English language arts and
mathematics at the end of each grade level. Initiative seeks to ensure that high school
graduates are prepared for postsecondary college programs or to enter the workforce.
• District Administrators: Leaders of faculty, curricula, and budget for their school district.
They set the tone and ensure the quality of education for their district.
• Employability Skills/Soft Skills: The transferable skills and attributes needed by
individuals in order to make them “employable.” These skills enable employees to
collaborate with their colleagues, solve problems, and make critical decisions.
• Industry: A group of manufacturers or businesses involved in the production of goods or
services.
• Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP): In order for school districts to receive Local
Control Funding Formula funds, they must develop a Local Control Accountability Plan
18

(LCAP) that describes the district’s goals and specific actions, along with expenditures
that the district will need in order to achieve those goals.
• Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF): Education finance system enacted in 2013-
2014 in the state of California that requires school districts, County Offices of Education,
and charter schools to develop, adopt, and annually update a three-year Local Control and
Accountability Plan (LCAP) using a template adopted by the California State Board of
Education.
• Local Education Agency (LEA): A commonly used synonym for a school district.
• No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): The reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act. The federal government’s reform and accountability model
for education.
• Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT): A globally recognized college admission test designed
as an integrated system made up of the SAT, Preliminary Scholastic Assessment Test/
National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (PSAT/ NMSQT), PSAT 10, and PSAT 8/9
• Stakeholders: Individuals and groups that occupy formal and informal roles within an
organization.
• Technical Skills: Abilities and knowledge needed to perform specific tasks.
• Urban Schools: Schools located in large central cities that serve a disproportionately high
number of at-risk students.
Organization of the Study
A mixed-methods approach was utilized for this study. The collection of both
quantitative and qualitative data allowed for a more holistic understanding to the research
questions in this study (Creswell, 2014).
19

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction to the Topic
The general public has believed that high schools have the responsibility of teaching
students to be college- and career-ready. This is evident in the college- and career-readiness
skills which have been incorporated into common core standards with the goal of defining the
knowledge and skills students should achieve in order to graduate with the ability to succeed in
entry-level, credit-bearing academic college courses and in workforce training courses (Conley et
al., 2011). Jobs in the current economy require different knowledge and skills from those in the
past. This new economy requires nearly everyone entering the workforce to have at least some
post-secondary education, not necessarily a typical four-year degree. Implementation of Career
Technical Education (CTE) programs provide students with opportunities to participate in
rigorous academic courses and prepare for college and career.
The review of the literature highlights key concepts that provide background information,
standards-based practices, and information on resources that can be allocated toward the
development and implementation of CTE programs. The literature review defined college- and
career-readiness, examined how CTE programs prepare students to be college- and career-ready,
and discussed possible funding options to create effective CTE programs. This information
provides a basis for district administrators in defining the role they play in the development,
implementation, and support of CTE programs.
History of College- and Career-Readiness
While college- and career-readiness appears to be the new catchy phrase in education, the
idea of preparing proficient students that can enter college or the workforce is nothing new. The
American educational system has always worked to maintain a balance between three competing
20

goals: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility (Labaree, 1997). In the early
1980’s, there was a definite concern that the American educational system had lost its advantage
and was not producing secondary graduates that could compete with the rest of the world. The
National Commission on Excellence in Education highlighted this deficiency in its report, A
Nation at Risk. In the report, members highlighted the complaint that business and military
leaders committed large amounts of money to remedial education and training programs
(Gardner, 1983). Additionally, the College Board’s Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) revealed
consistent declines in verbal and mathematic scores leading to a belief that students were
entering college unprepared for postsecondary coursework (Gardner, 1983). While these are just
two of the highlights from the report, they underscore the main point of A Nation at Risk, that
graduates were woefully unprepared for college or the workforce.
A Nation at Risk had a definitive impact on education and the government’s role. As a
result of the report, states took legislative action by establishing mandates, creating
accountability measures and developing commissions to evaluate their own educational systems
(Bell, 1993). Improving the educational experience for all American students appeared to be on
the national radar with American Presidents such as George H. Bush and Bill Clinton
campaigning with a focus on being the “Education President” (Bell, 1993). While bringing the
educational system to the state and national scene, the report also put the country on notice that
its students were not graduating college- and career-ready.
With education being part of national policy, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(NCLB, 2002) brought assessment and accountability to the forefront. According to Bush
(2001), NCLB provided the vision for reforming the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (ESEA) and provided a blueprint for education which included: increasing accountability
21

for student performance, focusing on what works, reducing bureaucracy, and increasing
flexibility and empowering parents. There was no mention of college- and career-readiness only
assessing standards that were already put into place. The increased focus on standards led to an
unclear future for CTE (Kazis, 2005). As with A Nation at Risk, the law highlighted the fact that
American students were behind their peers around the world. Although other supplemental laws
addressing college- and career-readiness were introduced, NCLB remained in place through
George W. Bush’s presidency and was reauthorized when the Every Student Succeeds Act
(ESSA) was introduced in 2015 under President Barack Obama.
One of the most important supplemental laws addressing college- and career-readiness
was the Carl D. Perkins CTE Improvement Act of 2006. This act was the fourth version of the
law that focused on allowing all students access to vocational programs while addressing jobs
and the economy (Threeton, 2007). Originally passed in 1984, the act was reauthorized in 1990,
1998, and 2006. The 2006 version is important in the history of college- and career-readiness
because it is the first piece of legislation that referred to CTE instead of vocational education
(Threeton, 2007). More importantly, the law defined CTE as:
organized educational activities that: (1) offer a sequence of courses . . . that (a) provides
individuals with coherent and rigorous content aligned with challenging academic
standards and relevant technical knowledge and skills needed to prepare for further
education and careers in current or emerging professions; (b) provides technical skill
proficiency, an industry-recognized credential, a certificate, or an associate degree; and
(c) may include prerequisite courses . . . that meet the requirements of this subparagraph;
and (2) include competency based applied learning that contributes to the academic
knowledge, higher-order reasoning and problem-solving skills, work attitudes, general
employability skills, technical skills, and occupation-specific skills, and knowledge of all
aspects of an industry, including entrepreneurship, of an individual (Perkins IV, section 3,
paragraph 5). (Perkins IV/CTEA, 2006, p. 1).

Once the Perkins Act reframed CTE, career- and college-readiness became part of the
national conversation regarding high school graduates. According to Betts, Young, Zao and
22

Bachofer (2016), 23 states currently mandate that graduates complete a college-preparatory and
career-ready curriculum that allows access to a rigorous course of study that students require for
college entry. While that may not be a national consensus, even prominent states like California
have seen large districts such as Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Diego Unified School Districts
adopt graduation policies requiring students to complete A-G coursework in order to graduate
from high school (Betts et al., 2016). The fact that the Perkins Act mentioned CTE, made it part
of the national discussion.
Skills Associated with College- and Career-Readiness
College- and career-readiness has been discussed in regard to its importance for high
school students but it is crucial to define what it actually entails. According to Achieve, Inc.
(2011), college- and career-readiness refers to the content knowledge and skills high school
graduates must possess in English and mathematics—including, but not limited to reading,
writing communications, teamwork, critical thinking, and problem solving—to be successful in
any and all future endeavors. While these are important factors for one to be successful at the
postsecondary level, Conley (2012) took it a step further by writing that a student who is defined
as college- and career-ready qualifies for entry-level college courses or career pathway training
programs without having to take remedial or developmental classwork. In other words, students
need to be ready for college-level classes and/or any training programs with no need for
remediation courses to be categorized as college- and career-ready. The next step is defining the
characteristics needed to be ready.
College- and career-readiness skills have been looked at to determine changes that need
to be made at the secondary level. According to Darling-Hammond, Wilhoit, and Pittenger
(2014), skills should include both content knowledge as well as “soft skills” that allow one to be
23

an active participant in their own learning. For purposes of this study, employability/soft skills
are the transferable skills and attributes needed by individuals in order to make them
“employable.” These skills enable employees to collaborate with their colleagues, solve
problems, and make critical decisions. In a study of successful secondary schools, the following
skills were identified: earning skills, cognitive strategies, content knowledge, and transition
knowledge and skills (Conley & McGaughy, 2012).
Learning skills. There are specific skills outside of content knowledge that are crucial to
being successful at the college- and career-level. According to Conley and McGaughy (2012),
learning skills such as time management, study skills, persistence, and ownership of learning are
skills needed for any and all postsecondary learning environments. These are basic skills that
would allow one to be successful before they learned actual content knowledge. In regard to
learning skills, Pittman (2010) referred to a commitment to learning involving achievement,
motivation, and school engagement. Both researchers believed that learning skills are one
component in determining whether a student is college- and career-ready.
Transition and knowledge skills. There are specific skills that are associated with
making the transition from secondary to post-secondary. Conley and McGaughy (2012)
mentioned ideas such as postsecondary awareness, postsecondary costs, knowledge of the job
market, and self-advocacy. Lack of knowledge regarding postsecondary educational options
create bigger chances for missed opportunities. For example, a student may fail to apply for
additional colleges because they are not aware of other schooling options. While academic and
behavioral skills are important, students must also be able to work through admissions and
financial aid processes (Roderick, Nagaoka, & Coca, 2009). Knowledge of admissions and
financial aid processes might also limit access to career certification programs. Gaps in
24

transition knowledge and skills may keep secondary students from exploring all options in regard
to postsecondary college- and career-options.
Key cognitive strategies. Postsecondary college- and career-options require specific
academic skills when it comes to completing tasks. Students must acquire and develop these
skills in order to be successful at the postsecondary level. According to Conley and McGaughy
(2012), students must possess a variety of cognitive strategies so that they can accomplish
tasks. Some of these strategies are the ability to “formulate problems, collect information,
interpret and analyze findings, communicate in a variety of modes, and do all of this with
precision and accuracy” (Conley & McGaughy, 2012, p. 31). All of these strategies provide
students with the ability to assess any problem they encounter and determine what they need to
address it. When looking at how to address teaching these skills, professional development for
teachers needs to focus on strategies for critical and analytical thinking, drawing inferences and
conclusions, conducting research and effectively communicating ideas verbally and in writing
(Moore et al., 2010). Cognitive strategies provide students with the necessary skills to be
successful across the curriculum and in any career.
Key content knowledge. Another important skill in college- and career-readiness is
content knowledge. These skills are not specific to one particular content although most would
mainly be found in the English classroom setting. According to Conley and McGaughy (2012),
foundational content such as speaking and listening, reading informational texts, writing in a
variety of genres and mathematical reasoning and problem solving are all content knowledge
skills that have proven to be successful in both the college- and career-settings. Other literature
also referred to the importance of developing content knowledge in addition to core academic
25

skills and metacognitive skills (Barnes, Slate, & Rojas-LeBouef, 2010; Callan, Finney, Kirst,
Usdan, & Venezia, 2006; Moore et al., 2010; Roderick et al., 2009).
Assessing College- and Career-Readiness
Developing definitions of college- and career-readiness are only the first steps in
preparing students for postsecondary education. Assessing the components of those definitions
has been challenging for secondary and postsecondary institutions. The United States
Department of Education (2010) issued a blueprint that discussed college- and career-readiness
success in relation to measures collected and reported at the state level. According to the U. S.
Department of Education (2010) these measures include:
• Advanced Placement course taking
• Dual credit courses
• Percentage of students who go to college
• College remediation rates of public high school graduates
• College grade point average and credit attainment
• Academic indicators for students from individual high schools
• SAT, ACT, or AP scores
• One-year college retention rates
These measures provide scores that can be quantified giving secondary institutions data as to
who is academically prepared for postsecondary coursework.
Individual states have begun to look at ways of assessing whether their students are
college- and career-ready. As part of the American Diploma Project (ADP), 44 states recognized
that there was a deficiency in expectations and achievement in their high schools (Achieve, Inc
2011). They created four priorities, one of which included developing a statewide assessment of
26

English and math for high schools that is connected to college- and career-ready expectations
(Achieve, Inc, 2011). Conley and McGaughy (2012) also addressed English and math
proficiency as key components of a college- and career-ready student. Since California has state
assessments that report data on English and math proficiency, it was mentioned as one of the
states that has a college- and career-assessment in place (Achieve, Inc., 2011).
While it is important to have academic measures in place, assessing learning skills
identified by Conley and McGaughy (2012) such as time management, study skills, persistence.
and ownership of learning are much more difficult. Lombardi, Seburn, and Conley (2011)
conducted a study using a sample of high school students in California, Colorado, Connecticut,
and Oregon that participated in a pilot test of the College & Career Ready School Diagnostic
(CCRSD). The CCRSD was chosen because it measured both self-monitoring and study skills
(Lombardi et al., 2011). Lombardi et al. (2011) found that use of the assessments could target
instruction to better integrate the use of self-monitoring by students. Additionally, results could
be used to determine how study skills could be merged into the curriculum (Lombardi et al,
2011). This study provides an opportunity to look at data other than academic measures.
The Relationship between CTE and College- and Career-Readiness
California Education Code/Career Technical Education Standards
California Education Code Section 51228 states “districts are encouraged to provide all
pupils with a rigorous academic curriculum that integrates academic and career skills,
incorporates applied learning in all disciplines, and prepares all pupils for high school graduation
and career entry” California Legislative Information (2017, para. (b)). Additionally, Education
Code Section 51224 decrees school district boards to “prescribe separate courses of study,
including, but not limited to, a course of study to prepare prospective pupils for admission to
27

state colleges and universities and a course of study for career technical training” California
Education Code Section 51224). Section 51228 also specifies that career technical training
should be “a course of study that provides an opportunity for those pupils to attain entry-level
employment skills in business or industry upon graduation from high school” (California
Legislative Information, 2017, para. (b)).
The CTE Model Curriculum Standards were developed in 2005 to identify the skills
required for specific pathways and help California districts and schools develop rigorous
curriculum to prepare students for college and careers. The CTE Framework for California
Public Schools was developed in 2007 by an advisory board and serves as a how-to manual for
teachers, school and district administrators, curriculum specialists, and school boards in
developing standards-based CTE pathways, courses, curricula, and assessments. The CTE
Model Curriculum Standards were revised in 2013 to incorporate the Beyond Knowledge
Construct, which demonstrated the importance of adding the CTE Performance dimension to the
cognitive dimension based on the Depth of Knowledge levels and revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
(California Department of Education, 2017).
The CTE Model Curriculum Standards include Standards for Career Ready Practice,
which describe the knowledge and skills that students need to acquire before entering a CTE
program, as part of the CTE sequence, or as integrated elements of other coursework in
preparation for careers and college. The standards are organized around 15 industry sectors and
include a description, anchor standards, pathway standards, and an academic alignment matrix.
California has 12 standards for Career Ready Practice; they align with the state’s CTE anchor
standards and reflect the expectations from business industry, labor and community
28

organizations, and secondary and postsecondary education representatives from 42 participating
states (California Department of Education, 2017).
The 11 anchor standards build on the Standards for Career Ready Practice and are
common across the 15 industry sectors (see Figure 1). Each anchor standard is followed by
performance indicators and are presented in a hierarchical progression of simple to more
complex tasks. The performance indicators provide guidance for curriculum design and
standards measurement. More specific industry-sector anchor standards are customized to better
reflect the skills necessary for each sector. The CTE standards, in conjunction with the Common
Core State Standards, define the skills students must acquire to be college- and career-ready.
Skills Needed for College Career Readiness
The 12 standards for Career Ready Practice followed in California are the same for all
industry sectors. These practices reflect the expectations from the business industry, labor and
community organizations, and secondary and postsecondary education. One can connect these
practices to the skills identified by Conley and McGaughy (2012) as being essential to college-
and career-readiness, which fall into four key categories: learning skills and techniques,
cognitive strategies, content knowledge, and transition knowledge and skills. In their analysis,
Conley and McGaughy stated that students must acquire the cognitive strategies that enable them
to communicate, interpret, research, have precision and accuracy, and carry out problem
formulation. Students must also attain content knowledge that they value at an appropriate
challenge level and effort, show attribution, and be able to structure knowledge. Conley and
McGaughy explained that students must take ownership of their learning and develop learning
techniques. Students must learn how they learn to become lifelong learners. Furthermore,
students must learn the process to transition between institutions including postsecondary
29

awareness and costs, the matriculation process, their role and identity, career awareness, and
self-advocacy.

Source: California Department of Education, 2013, p. 6.
Figure 1: Career Technical Education Anchor Standards
30

The key skills identified by Conley and McGaughy (2012) line up with the expectations
in the California CTE standards. CTE programs can be organized in many different models
including career academies, Linked Learning, and early college high schools; nevertheless, they
are all designed to provide students various opportunities to develop the skills they need to be
college- and career-ready. Research in the field of CTE has determined that students who
participate in CTE programs have a higher probability of graduating from high school than their
peers (Castellano, Richardson, Sundell, & Stone, 2015). In a study conducted in 2015,
researchers found that students who participated in CTE courses performed better than their
peers because they were exposed to context-based learning (Castellano, Richardson et al., 2015).
Context-based exposure allows students to better grasp the relevance of academic subjects,
become more engaged by the content of the curriculum, and develop postsecondary education
and career aspirations. The researchers in the study recommended that school districts seek ways
to increase enrollment in pathways of study and encourage students to participate in CTE course
sequences. The increase in student enrollment will lead to high student engagement and
participation in a field of interest and in turn increase graduation rates.
In addition to context-based learning, school-based factors such as educational
aspirations, program quality, and adults’ impact on college enrollment determined student
performance. A 2013 study conducted by Loera, Nakamoto, Oh, and Rueda (2013) found that
students’ perceptions regarding the quality and effectiveness of a CTE program influenced their
choice to participate. This finding was especially important when districts were in the early
stages of developing their course offerings. Proper resources must be allocated by district and
school site administrators so that CTE pathways are well equipped and students can recognize
the value of the program being offered. Loera et al. (2013) also found that CTE teachers play a
31

critical role in shaping students’ educational and career choices. Students perceived their
teachers as being knowledgeable in a career industry when the teachers could combine classroom
instruction with real-life work experience and expose the students to real employment (Loera et
al., 2013).
Soulé and Warrick (2015) defined 21st century readiness for all students and provided
districts with guidance on how to provide students support. Soulé and Warrick called for a
paradigm shift in education to support the global, information-centric, and technology-infused
reality of the 21st century. Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21, Kozma, 2008), a non-
profit organization made up of a coalition of education, business, community, and government
leaders, supported the innovative, collaborative, and community-embedded experiences that can
provide all students the opportunities to learn the skills they need to be effective citizens,
workers, and leaders.
P21 (Kozma, 2008) highlighted the new skill demands that presented themselves with the
fundamental changes that have taken place in today’s economy, jobs, and businesses. The
increase in the use of technology and the shift from an industrial economy has raised the demand
for problem-solving and communication tasks (Kozma, 2008). The framework created by P21
encompasses the skills, knowledge, and expertise that students must master along with the
learning supports necessary to attain college- and career-readiness. The P21 Framework
represents 21st century student outcomes in the arches of the rainbow and support systems in the
pools at the bottom (see Figure 2).
Every implementation strategy for 21st century learning requires the attainment of core
academics for all students. Students must master the essential skills for success in today’s world
known as the 4Cs: critical thinking and problem-solving, communication, collaboration, and
32

Source: Soulé and Warrick, 2015, p. 181.
Figure 2: P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning

creativity and innovation. When schools use standards, assessments, curriculum and instruction,
professional development, and learning environments as a foundation to combine these necessary
supports, students are more engaged in the learning process and graduate better prepared to
thrive in college, career and life (Soulé & Warrick, 2015).
Soulé and Warrick (2015) stated that 21st century education models offer learning
opportunities that make direct connections for students between what they learn, how it is
connected to their community, and its association with what students will need to know in
college and the workplace. P21 (Kozma, 2008) has recognized exemplar learning programs
since 2013. A pilot study conducted in 2015 showed exemplar learning programs varied in
strengths and approaches, but all programs shared five common interactive themes, (1) a climate
33

of achievement, (2) distributed leadership, (3) student agency, (4) research & evidence, and (5)
an engaged community.
Dual Enrollment and Articulation Agreements
Soulé and Warrick (2015) called for a paradigm shift in how and what students learn to
prepare for the new demands of the changing economy. They stated that the new proposed
mindset requires various stakeholders to work together to make learning meaningful to students
and teach them how to apply the concepts they learn to the real-world setting. One example of
helping students apply learned concepts to real world settings is creating the opportunities for
them to serve as interns in community businesses. These types of opportunities can only be
created successfully through collaboration among policy makers, business executives, education
leaders, and stakeholders. Through such collaboration, students and adults can create
meaningful learning opportunities reflective of workplace challenges and demands.
Students can also prepare for college- and career-readiness through participation in dual
enrollment programs. Dual enrollment is an accelerated program that allows students
opportunities to earn college credit while in high school. Available in all 50 states, dual
enrollment offers several benefits for students including preparation for college coursework and
degree attainment, an increased likelihood of graduating from high school and earning higher
grades in college (An, 2013a). An’s (2013b) research found that dual enrollment positively
influences academic performance and college readiness and that students who participated in
dual enrollment programs were less likely to participate in remediation than non-dual enrollees.
Participation in dual enrollment programs increase academic rigor of the high school
curriculum, help low-achieving students meet high academic standards, provide more academic
opportunities and electives in small or economically struggling schools, prevent high school
34

dropout and increase student aspirations, help students acclimate to college life and reduce the
cost of college for students (Karp & Hughes, 2008). CTE students are taking part in dual
enrollment opportunities often offered as explicit parts of their CTE programs. Participation in
dual enrollment courses can upgrade the CTE curriculum by providing students access to
rigorous college courses, automatically awards students college credit upon successful
completion of the course, and enables students to participate in courses without having to invest
in costly equipment.
Karp and Hughes (2008) found that participation in dual enrollment opportunities
increased graduation rates and encouraged students to pursue college. Once in college, CTE
students who participated in dual enrollment were more likely to persist in college and obtain
higher grades. Dual enrollees also made faster progress toward a college credential than students
who did not participate in dual enrollment. Because of the promising use of dual enrollment as a
strategy to encourage students to access and succeed in postsecondary education, the researchers
suggested that collaborations among high schools and colleges should focus on ways that dual
enrollment can be integrated into current and future career pathways (Karp & Hughes, 2008).
A major purpose of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 2006
was to strengthen the connections between secondary and postsecondary education (King &
West, 2009). With the emphasis on the secondary to postsecondary connections, high schools
and community colleges have sought out the development of formal articulation agreements.
The process of developing articulation agreements between secondary and postsecondary
institutions is a long one. It requires that the secondary organization submit curricular
information to the postsecondary institution so that a board can review it and determine course
content equivalency. If the postsecondary institution deems that the high school course is
35

equivalent, the articulation agreement is granted. The established articulation agreement sets the
parameters and requirements that students must fulfill in order to receive college credit for the
course completed in high school.
Career Pathways
During much of America’s educational history, there has been a focus on either preparing
secondary students to be “college ready” or “career ready” (Meeder, 2016). Careers in the
current economic structure require a distinct set of knowledge and skills than those that were
required in the past. The 21st century workplace requires that nearly everyone who enters the
workforce have some level of postsecondary education, which does not always mean a typical
four-year college degree. According to Schwartz, Keppel, and Symonds (2012), the workplace
requires a certain level of technical skills that require licenses or certificates, which in turn
require a change to the educational practices at the secondary level.
The shift in education in California from preparing students as “college-bound” or
“career-bound” and instead focusing on preparing them to be ready for both college and career
transpired with the implementation of Common Core State Standards (CCSS), which was
enacted in 2010. As our society has changed, so have the demands of the workforce; therefore.
inspiring a reform in the way students are educated in the public-school system. According to
Bloom (2010), two key motivators for preparing all students to be college- and career-ready are
“economic competitiveness and social equity” (p. 4). Essentially the shift came as a direct result
of the ever-changing workforce needs of the 21st century workplace.
Career Technical Education (CTE) programs have become an integral part of preparing
students to be college- and career-ready. CTE is much more than simply training students for
skilled work in agriculture, trade, or the industry sector. CTE provides an academic foundation,
36

combined with technical and employability/soft skills and knowledge that are essential for
preparing students to be successful for the 21st century workforce (Wonacott, 2003). By
integrating academic rigor into CTE programs, students can be taught the necessary academic
skills while simultaneously learning the technical and employability skills they will need to be
successful in the workforce (Threeton, 2007). For purposes of this research, CTE is defined as
courses that provide students with challenging academic, technical, and employability/soft skills
and knowledge they need to prepare for further education and for careers in emerging and
established professions.
Another key aspect of CTE are career pathways. According to the California Department
of Education (2010), a career pathway is defined as a multi-year, comprehensive program of
study that integrates academic and technical skills that are formed around broad themes, interest
areas, or industry sectors. Career pathways provide a seamless educational structure that
includes training from secondary education to postsecondary and the workforce. By providing a
series of integrated courses with the same theme in mind, students develop a richer
understanding of that particular career interest, which better prepares them to be successful in
postsecondary college- and career-options. Career pathways are intended to assist students in
becoming college- and career-ready by preparing them to work through the complexities of a
career after entering and completing postsecondary education and training (Meeder,
2016). Career pathways emerged as a way to encourage and support secondary students’
transition from high school to college and careers. They provide a framework for students to
learn relevant coursework that incorporates academic rigor, technical skills, and
employability/soft skills that are vital in the workforce. Essentially, career pathways provide an
37

opportunity for students to learn technical skills with academic rigor that build up through each
course taken in the pathway series.
According to Castellano, Stringfield, and Stone (2003) “career pathways are…intended to
provide a rigorous, coherent program of study that includes high-level academics in addition to
technology applications and work-based learning” (p. 256). Career pathways provide contextual
learning of technical and employability/soft skills with academic rigor within the classroom
setting and work-based and/or hands-on learning opportunities outside of school or within a
workshop type setting (such as a construction automotive program within a school’s automotive
shop). Participation in career pathways can prepare students to be successful by teaching the
necessary skills needed to succeed in the workforce and aligning courses of study with
postsecondary institutions. Additionally, career pathways tend to have strong partnerships with
employers who are very involved in the programs, either by means of offering mentorships,
internships, job-shadowing, or apprenticeship opportunities.
Strong college- and career-pathway programs focus on the following priorities:
defining and developing Career and Life Readiness; engaging all students in career
development, offering learners engaging and relevant Pathway Programs, connecting
students with employers and community-based learning experience; creating engaging
and connected learning across the curriculum; and linking programs and services across
secondary, postsecondary, and workforce systems. (Meeder, 2016, 58-59)

Coursework for career pathways need be rigorous and sequential. Courses and skills
need to build upon one another for students to transition from one level to the next. Involvement
and engagement with postsecondary institutions and employers are critical for priorities of career
pathway programs as this helps ensure that the pathways incorporate the necessary skills,
coursework or certifications necessary for employment or postsecondary institutions.
Additionally, career pathways can provide an opportunity for students to participate in dual
38

enrollment with postsecondary institutions. As previously mentioned, participation in dual
enrollment in career pathways can provide high school students with opportunities to earn both
high school and college credit.
Allocation of Funding Resources
Local Control Funding Formula
In June of 2013, the state of California radically reformed its educational finance system
when Governor Jerry Brown signed into law the new educational funding model known as the
Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The LCFF “represents the most significant change in
California’s funding system for K-12 schools in four decades” (California Teacher’s Association,
2017, p. 1). The LCFF is meant to provide a more equitable way of allocating funds to school
districts, provide support for underperforming districts, and change the way that school and
district performance is evaluated by the state (Bae & Darling-Hammond, 2014). With the
implementation of this law, California eliminated most of the existing funding categories that
school districts were previously required to earmark specific funding for, giving them more
discretion on how to fund different educational programs that would best support the needs of
their district and student population (Taylor, 2013). Essentially, funding shifted from categorical
programs to district and student needs, with weighted formulas for students with greater need
(Bae & Darling-Hammond, 2014).
The enactment of the LCFF served as a way to consolidate most categorical programs
into allocation of funding for districts that helps move decision making from the state to the local
level (Hill, Warren, Murphy, Ugo, & Pathak, 2016). Prior to the LCFF, the state would allocate
funds to districts based on a unique revenue limit, which was then multiplied by the district’s
average daily attendance (ADA; CDE, 2015a, LCFF Frequently Asked
39

Questions). Additionally, the state provided restricted funding to school districts for dozens of
categorical programs that were intended to provide specific services dependent on the
demographics and student needs of each school district (CDE, 2015a, LCFF Frequently Asked
Questions). Under the LCFF, California provides districts the majority of their funding through
base grants which are dependent on their ADA with slight adjustments depending on four grade
spans, i.e., kindergarten through grade 3 ($6,845 per student), grades 4-6 ($6,947 per student),
grades 7-8 ($7,154 per student), and grades 9-12 ($8,289 per student) (Taylor, 2013, p. 2). The
high school grade span included a 2.6% increase of the base rate (initially this amounted to $216
per student); although the adjustment is not designated for any education service in particular,
the origin of the adjustment is related to the costs associated to providing career technical
education (CTE; Taylor, 2013). The 2.6% adjustment reflected the average amount spent per
student on CTE or Regional Occupational Programs (ROP) under the state’s old funding system
(Taylor, 2013). Base rates are adjusted annually to reflect the cost-of-living (COLA) increases
(CDE, 2015a, LCFF Frequently Asked Questions).
Funding is distributed directly to school districts rather than individual schools.
Additionally, it provides differentiated funding that is equal to 20% of the base funding (adjusted
for grade span) to districts based on demographics, specifically those districts with a large
percentage of high-needs students. The LCFF defined high-needs students as low-income
children (specifically students who qualify for free or reduced priced meals), English learners,
and homeless and foster youth (CDE, 2015b, LCFF Overview). High-needs populations are
referred to as targeted disadvantaged students by LCFF (CDE, 2015b, LCFF Overview). This
additional 20% supplemental grant for targeted disadvantaged students is provided for
unduplicated counts; meaning that if a student qualifies in two or three of the targeted
40

populations, the student will only be counted once. Additionally, LCFF provides a concentration
grant for districts where English learner and low-income demographics exceed 55% of their total
enrollment. This concentration grant is funded at 50% of the adjusted grade span base grant for
the particular percentage of students exceeding the 55%.
The LCFF does not solely focus on school finance reform; it also “substantially
reorganizes and decentralizes the delivery of public education in California” including a new
accountability framework (Affeldt, 2015, p. 4). Districts are required to identify the progress
they are making and have made with various student subgroups. The two main goals for the
LCFF are to enhance the academic achievement of students by providing targeted funds to
districts in order for them to improve outcomes of high-need students and bring state funding
back to the local control at the district and school level while holding them accountable for
obtaining results. The intent was to improve educational services for high-need students utilizing
greater flexibility, local accountability, and targeted student funding based on demographics
(Koppich, Humphrey, & Marsh, 2015). The implementation of the LCFF provided school
districts the flexibility of allocating their funding as they see fit in order to enhance student
outcomes. Although districts are provided with flexibility in terms of how to spend their
weighted funds, the LCFF requires them to increase or enhance services for high-need students
(Affeldt, 2015).
The LCFF put into place rules related to transparency and accountability in districts
(Taylor, 2013). As part of these new rules, districts are required to develop and adopt a Local
Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), the LCFF’s local accountability counterpart. In order for
the LCFF funds to be distributed, each district is required to develop and adopt a 3-year strategic
plan that identifies the annual goals and specific actions that will be taken to achieve these goals
41

in order to address the state’s eight priority areas and any local priorities (Bae & Darling-
Hammond, 2014). Once adopted by the school board, the LCAPs are to be revisited and updated
annually in which the previous year’s goals, actions, and expenses are reviewed to determine
progress and make corrections or revisions as needed (Affeldt, 2015). Examples of
accountability measures that could be utilized to assess progress on the LCAP goals can include:
college- and career-readiness, performance on state and local assessments, graduation rates, A-G
completion rates, English learner reclassification rate, attendance rates, rate of teacher mis-
assignment, suspension and expulsion rates, levels of parental participation and satisfaction, and
reports on facilities and availability of instructional materials (CDE, 2015b, Local control
funding formula overview). After three years, a new 3-year LCAP is to be developed and
adopted by each district, and the process begins once again. Districts that fail to meet their
LCAP’s goals and do not improve education outcomes are to receive aid through a system of
support and intervention (Taylor, 2013).
The LCFF also required that parents, students, teachers, bargaining units, site
administrators, and other community members participate and be involved in the process of
deciding how LCFF funds are used and gives authority to supervise a critical element of the
LCFF, the completion of the LCAP, to County Offices of Education (Koppich et al., 2015). This
new requirement shifts the way that many districts engage with their community. Districts are
encouraged to engage with community stakeholders through various means, including but not
limited to surveys, district-wide meetings, forums, parent meetings, and/or school site
meetings. At the very minimum, districts are required to hold two public hearings to discuss and
adopt their LCAP.
42

Each district’s LCAP must include annual goals and action steps in each of the eight state
priorities. The eight state priority areas fall under three categories: conditions of learning,
student outcomes, and engagement. The eight state priorities are: basic services, implementation
of Common Core State Standards, course access, parental involvement, student engagement,
school climate, student achievement (CDE, 2016a, State Priority Related Resources), and other
student outcomes (see Figure 3). The eight state priorities “are intended to encompass the key
ingredients of high-quality education programs” (Taylor, 2013, p. 10).
These eight state priorities are intended to encourage districts to pay closer attention to
what the state considers key mechanisms of a high-quality education system. The priority of
implementation of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) is a key factor in career technical
education (CTE) as it includes a clear emphasis on graduating students that are both college- and
career-ready. Therefore, it is imperative that districts develop strong educational programs that
focus on both college- and career-ready skills (Bae & Darling-Hammond, 2014). It is evident
that the “needs of the 21st century workforce are rapidly changing amidst demographic shifts,
technological advances, and economic globalization” (Bae & Darling-Hammond, 2014, p. 8).
A commonly recommended measure to use as an indicator of career readiness is the
completion of high-quality CTE pathways (Bae & Darling-Hammond, 2014). CTE is defined as
“a program of study that involves a multiyear sequence of courses that integrates core academic
knowledge with technical and occupational knowledge to provide students with a pathway to
postsecondary education and careers” (CDE, n.d., Career Technical Education, p. 1).
Throughout the state of California, many high schools offer stand-alone CTE courses or Career
Pathways that incorporate career readiness with academic preparation (Bae & Darling-
Hammond, 2014). The integration of career pathways with academic curriculum is vital given
43

Source: Taylor, 2013, p. 12.

Figure 3: Eight State Priorities and Their Indicators

that high school graduation college requirements will typically not provide enough room in
students’ academic schedules to complete both A-G requirements and career pathways (Bae &
Darling-Hammond, 2014).
Being that the LCFF has already made a 2.6% adjustment per student in high school to
account for CTE, districts can utilize this funding to develop or further develop CTE programs to
meet the rigor of college preparatory coursework while simultaneously incorporating
employability/soft skills to prepare students for postsecondary education and careers. This 2.6%
base grant adjustment for high school students can be strategically used to provide CTE at the
high school level. The LCFF and LCAP legislation has pushed California districts to redefine
postsecondary success by ensuring that each district include college- and career-readiness
44

indicators to prepare all students for both postsecondary options (Bae & Darling-Hammond,
2014).
Additional Funding
In addition to allocating funding resources through the LCAP and the LCFF’s 2.6%
adjustment on the base grant amount for grades 9-12 (related to the costs that are associated with
providing CTE in high school), districts can apply for additional funding through different
federal and state grants, depending on what is available. Obtaining additional funds via grants
and possible grants can be critical for districts who are trying to implement and/or improve the
quality of CTE programs for students.
The Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Acts of 1984 and 1990 renamed the Carl D.
Perkins Career and Technical Education Act in 2006, not only requires that CTE curriculum be
more academically rigorous and includes skills to prepare students for the 21st century
workforce but also provides funding for CTE programs (Friedel, 2011). The reauthorization of
the Perkins Act in 2006 increased the accountability for academic rigor, CTE teacher
credentialing, and the attainment of technical and employability/soft skills (Carl D. Perkins CTE
Improvement Act of 2006, 2006). The Perkins Act accounts for over $1.5 billion dollars
nationally in CTE funding. It allocates a certain amount of funding to each state nationwide and
provides guidelines to ensure that quality CTE programs are implemented within each
district. The states then determine how to allocate the funding to provide CTE resources based
on the established guidelines provided by the Perkins Act.
Conclusion
District administrators play a key role in the development, implementation, and support
of CTE programs. District administrators can use their positions to allocate appropriate
45

resources for the efficient implementation of career pathways. CTE programs implement
educational strategies designed to provide students with the academic, technical, and
employability/soft skills and knowledge to pursue postsecondary training. Students participating
in CTE courses will enter their fields prepared for ongoing learning as CTE includes
academically rigorous, integrated, and sequenced programs of study that align with and lead to
postsecondary education (Brand et al., 2013).

46

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Chapter three includes a description of the purpose and design of the study, identifies the
research participants, clarifies how data was collected and analyzed, explains the instruments
used to conduct the research, and specifies ethical considerations.
Purpose of the Study
This study sought to examine the role of district administrators in allocating resources
and developing effective Career Technical Education (CTE) programs. This study analyzed the
resources allocated by districts to support the implementation of CTE programs to improve
college- and career-readiness. Convenience/purposeful sampling was used for the study. It used
a mixed-methods approach including qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitative
information was collected through interviews and quantitative data was comprised of a Likert-
style survey.
Research Questions
This study concentrated on the following research questions:
1. What is the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education
programs to support college- and career-readiness?
2. What Career Technical Education programs have districts supported for implementation?
3. What resources do districts allocate to support Career Technical Education programs?
4. What types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in
improving college- and career-readiness?
This study was conducted from a critical research perspective. The goal in critical
inquiry is to critique and challenge, and to transform and empower. Through critical inquiry, this
study sought to explain how district administrators can be instrumental to the development of
47

CTE courses. It challenges Local Education Agencies to transform the learning environment for
students and empower them to be college- and career-ready (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Study Methods
Creswell (2014) listed the following steps for conducting a research study, (1) identifying
a research problem, (2) reviewing the literature, (3) specifying a purpose for research,
(4) collecting data, (5) analyzing and interpreting the data, and (6) reporting and evaluating
research. This study was built around these guidelines and conducted using a mixed-methods
approach including qualitative and quantitative data. The combination of quantitative and
qualitative data serves to increase methodological rigor (Patton, 2002). The study was conducted
with district administrators in the state of California who play a role in the development,
implementation, and support of CTE programs in their district. The study involved the collection
of qualitative data through interviews. Quantitative data in the form of a Likert-style surveys
was also collected.
Assertions regarding the efficiency of CTE programs was made based on quantitative
data collected. Qualitative data provided additional information to determine the role of district
administration in the development, implementation, and support of CTE programs, allocation of
resources, and the types of CTE programs determined to be effective in preparing students for
college and careers. The use of qualitative and quantitative data allowed for data triangulation
and increase the validity of the evidence collected (Creswell, 2014)
Sample and Population
Purposeful criterion sampling was used to identify and select district administrators who
play a role in the development, implementation, and support of CTE programs within their
district for the collection of quantitative data using a Likert-style survey. Purposeful criterion
48

sampling is a technique that is widely used in qualitative research for the identification and
selection of information-rich cases for the most effective use of limited resources (Patton, 2002).
The process involves the identification and selection of individuals or groups of individuals that
are knowledgeable about or experienced with the research topic (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011).
Convenience sampling was used for the interview portion of this study. Convenience
sampling is a non-probability sample in which respondents are chosen based on their
convenience and availability (Creswell, 2014). District administrators were selected to
participate in a qualitative interview from the survey participants who indicated their willingness
to do so and were interviewed based on their availability.
Instrumentation
Critical research theory allows the researcher to critique and challenge ideas and seek to
transform and empower (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The use of this lens allowed the researcher
to understand and research challenges associated with the development, implementation, and
support of CTE programs and seek information to determine how district administrators can be
instrumental to bring about change. A critical research perspective challenges Local Education
Agencies to transform the learning environment for students and empower them to be college-
and career-ready. Survey and interview questions for this study were developed to facilitate
research and ensure a consistent approach for data collection. The survey and interview
questions were aligned with the research questions for this study (Appendix A).
Data Collection
Identified district administrators received an email with a Request to Participate letter
(Appendix B) and a link to complete the quantitative survey (Appendix C). Based on the
indication of their willingness to participate in an interview for qualitative data collection,
49

participants were contacted again to set up an interview time. In order to make an interview
convenient for the participant, interviews were conducted at a time and place convenient to the
participant (Appendix D). Permission was requested from participants to use an audio recording
device to record each interview for accuracy. Audio recording allowed the researcher to focus
on the participants’ responses during the interview. All participants were provided the option to
accept or decline being recorded on an audio device.
To guarantee respondents in this study are protected, applications were submitted to the
Institutional Review Board at the University of Southern California for approval. All
information pertaining to the participants in this study will remain confidential, and participation
will be voluntary.
Data Analysis
Interview transcripts were utilized to create a codebook for analysis. Corbin and Strauss
(2008) described coding as the process used to derive and develop concepts from data. The
coding process began with the identification of open codes; the open codes were then be refined
into axial codes relating categories and properties (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The final step in
the analysis of interview data entailed creating selective codes per Merriam and Tisdell (2015)
which were used to develop a proposition or hypothesis.
Summary
This chapter explained the purpose of the study, research questions, study methods,
sample population, data collection, and the data analysis process used in the study. The goals of
the study were best accomplished through a mixed-method study design that included a
quantitative survey and a qualitative interview of district administrators involved in the
development, implementation, and support of CTE programs. The researchers made every effort
50

to be transparent in the process so as to limit the appearance of impropriety (Creswell, 2014).
Chapter Four includes an analysis of the data collected and the major findings.

51

CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION

Introduction
Chapter four includes a presentation and discussion of data collected from a mixed-
methods study to determine how Local Education Agencies (LEA) allocate resources in support
of graduating students that are college- and career-ready. More specifically, the research was
conducted to determine how resources are distributed in regard to implementation and
maintenance of effective Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs. Quantitative data
was collected using a Likert-style survey that features questions regarding allocation of resources
for CTE courses. Qualitative data was compiled based on interviews with school district
superintendents in regard to selection and funding for CTE courses. This chapter includes a
presentation of the response rates of the online surveys as well as quantitative data from the
responses. Additionally, data from superintendent interviews will be presented and will include
demographic information for the districts they lead. Finally, the qualitative and quantitative data
will be discussed in relation to the research findings.
The study was guided by the following research questions:
1. What is the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education
programs to support college- and career-readiness?
2. What Career Technical Education programs have districts supported for implementation?
3. What resources do districts allocate to support Career Technical Education programs?
4. What types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in
improving college- and career-readiness?

52

Response Rates
Surveys were sent out to various districts throughout California that have CTE programs
in place and are eligible for grants through the Vocational Education Basic Grant Award from
the U. S. Department of Education under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education
Improvement Act of 2006. Responses were received from the following counties: Los Angeles,
Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura.
Since the study focused on allocation of resources for CTE programs, surveys were sent
to administrators in district-level leadership positions whose job description included CTE
programs such as Directors, Assistant Directors, and Superintendents. While superintendents
aren’t specifically responsible for CTE programs, they were included because they are tasked
with enforcing the vision of the LEA and, therefore, would ultimately be responsible for
allocation of all resources in the district.
Based on the selection criteria, 56 surveys were distributed to district administrators
throughout central and southern California. Table 1 shows that 28 participants chose to
participate in the survey resulting in a response rate of 50% of district administrators. Of the 28
respondents, 21 were willing to participate in a 30-minute interview.

Table 1
Quantitative Survey: Response Rate
Measure Invitees No. Participated % Participated
District
Administrators
56 28 50

53

Demographic Data
Interview participants were chosen using convenience sampling. Convenience sampling
involves interviewing people that can be easily reached and are willing to participate. Two
responded to the survey and indicated they were available for an interview while the remaining
interviewees were selected randomly by the researcher. Five superintendents were interviewed
for the study and their demographic information in Table 2. Eighty percent of the interviewees
were male with 20% being female. Additionally, 80% were White with 20% being Hispanic.
The average age of those interviewed was 52.4 years old and the average time in education was
29.8 years. They had been a superintendent an average of 5.2 years. While in the classroom,
80% had been social studies teachers while 20% had been English teachers.

Table 2
Qualitative Interview: Superintendents Demographic Data

Superintendent

Gender

Age

Race
Years in
Education
Educational
Attainment
Subject
Taught
Years as
Superintendent
A M 44 Hispanic 22 Ed.D Social
Studies

1
B M 55 White 34 Ed.D Social
Studies

10
C M 53 White 30 Ed.D Social
Studies

7
D M 56 White 31 Ed.D Social
Studies

3
E F 54 White 32 Ed.D English 5

Superintendents interviewed led districts that varied in size, socio-economics, English
Language Learners, and ethnic breakdowns. The largest district served 24,132 students while the
54

smallest numbered 5,838. The socio-economic division was measured by the number of students
eligible for free and reduced lunch. That percentage went from 36.8% to 88.4%. The majority
ethnic group in all districts was Hispanic with the district led by Superintendent B having the
most diverse population. Table 3 lists the five districts in the study and the demographics for
each.

Table 3
Demographics of Superintendents ’ Districts

District

Enrollment
Free and
Reduced
Lunch %
English
Learners
%
Ethnic
Breakdown
%
A 9,033 88.4 20 Hispanic-77
White-1
Asian-20
Black-1
Other-1

B 24,130 36.8 19.2 Hispanic-43
White-27
Asian-20
Black-1
Other-5

C 11,910 70 9.5 Hispanic-77
White-11
Asian-5
Black-3
Other-4

D 13,712 63 7.7 Hispanic-63
White-15
Asian-12
Black-7
Other-3

E 5,838 59.4 13.5 Hispanic-62
White-22
Asian-7
Black-7
Other-2

55

Research Question One
What is the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education
programs to support college- and career-readiness?
Quantitative Data
District administrators play a key role in the development, implementation, and support
of CTE programs. It is important to understand their thoughts on the effectiveness of CTE
programs in regard to preparing students to be college- and career-ready as well as their views on
knowledge of CTE standards, the importance of data, financial resources, and human capital.
Additionally, it is important to look at district administrators’ beliefs on postsecondary
articulation, the importance of working with industry partners and the availability of internship
opportunities since they are the people that will be working to develop most of these agreements.
When analyzing the quantitative data, 66.7% of district administrators strongly agreed and
29.6% agreed that CTE programs are effective in preparing students to be college- and career-
ready; only 3.7% of the respondents disagreed with the statement.
A large majority of district administrators replied that knowledge of CTE standards was
important. Of the respondents, 63% strongly agreed and 33.3% agreed that knowledge of CTE
standards was important. Only 3.7% disagreed with the idea that knowledge of CTE standards
was important for CTE administrators.
Data was another area that was important for district administrators in regard to CTE
program development. All respondents agreed with the statement “It is important to make data-
driven decisions regarding CTE program development.” More specifically, 85.2% strongly
agreed while 14.8% agreed with the statement. None of the district administrators disagreed
with the importance of data in relation to CTE programs.
56

District administrators also believed strongly in the use of financial resources and human
capital in the development of effective CTE programs. In regard to financial resources, all
participants agreed in their importance with 88.9% strongly agreeing and 11.1% agreeing. None
of the participants disagreed with the importance of using financial resources to develop
effective CTE programs. The percentages were similar when looking at human capital with
85.2% of respondents strongly agreeing and 14.8% agreeing that resources must be invested in
human capital to develop effective CTE programs.
Industry partners were deemed beneficial in the development, implementation, and
support of CTE programs. When answering the question about industry partners, 85.2% of the
participants strongly agreed and 11.1% agreed that partnering with industry was important for
CTE programs. Only 3.7% of respondents disagreed with the importance of industry partners.
Participant quotes were not added here because it was data from the quantitative survey.
Articulation agreements were important to district administrators but there was some
variation in the responses. The percentages of strongly agree and agree were even with both
coming in at 44.4%. There was some disagreement on postsecondary articulation with 7.4%
disagreeing and 3.7% strongly disagreeing.
Internship opportunities for CTE students is another area that saw variation in responses.
When answering a question about the availability of internship opportunities in their district,
25.9% of district administrators strongly agreed and 33.3% agreed that there were internships
available. On the other hand, 33.9% disagreed and 7.4% strongly disagreed that internship
opportunities were available to CTE students in their district. Table 4 lists the data on survey
questions related to district administrator’s role in developing, implementing, and supporting
CTE programs.
57

Table 4
District Administrators and their Role in the Development, Implementation and Support of
CTE Programs

Question
Strongly Disagree
(1)
Disagree
(2)
Agree
(3)
Strongly Agree
(4)
CTE Programs are
Effective in Preparing
students to be College-
and Career-Ready
1
3.7%
8
29.6%
18
66.7%
It is Important that
District Administrators
be Knowledgeable
about CTE Standards
1
3.7%
9
33.3%
17
63%
It is Important to Make
Data Driven Decisions
Regarding CTE
Programs
4
14.8%
23
85.2%
To Have an Effective
CTE Program, Financial
Resources Must be
Allocated
3
11.1%
24
88.9%
To have an Effective
CTE Program,
Resources Must be
Invested in Human
Capital
4
14.8%
23
85.2%
Industry Partners are
Beneficial in the
Development,
Implementation, and
Support of CTE
Programs
1
3.7%
3
11.1%
23
85.2%
CTE Programs in my
District are Articulated
with Postsecondary
Institutions
1
3.7%
2
7.4%
12
44.4%
12
44.4%

58

Table 4 (Cont’d.)

Question
Strongly Disagree
(1)
Disagree
(2)
Agree
(3)
Strongly Agree
(4)
There are Internship
Opportunities Available
to CTE Students in my
District
2
7.4%
9
33.3%
9
33.3%
7
25.9%

Qualitative Data
When analyzing the data from superintendent interviews in regard to their role in
developing CTE programs to support college- and career-readiness, two major themes emerged.
The first major theme was that superintendents provide the vision for the overall development of
the program. The second was the role of superintendents in building relationships with the
community and industry to develop opportunities for CTE students.
Vision. All of the participating superintendents were clear about their role in the
development of CTE programs. Their job was to ensure that the vision for the district was met.
This is true across the board in relation to all programs. While they may have specific directors
or assistant superintendents that are specifically responsible for these programs, it is ultimately
the job of the superintendent to ensure district initiatives and programs are a success.
Superintendent D summed it up with this statement, “My role is pretty much working with the
Board to set the vision for the school district. So, I’m a part of that leadership team that makes
those decisions in regard to all programs.” Similarly, Superintendent B stated his role as “mostly
setting vision,” and Superintendent C responded that “I play the global role.” Superintendent A
expanded more on his answer, saying:
My role is to represent the district in making recommendations about what’s happening
statewide, when I go to statewide conferences, about which CTE programs are the ones
59

high in demand for jobs and how we can bring those programs into our district and
advocate for those programs.

Superintendent A may not explicitly use the word vision but his statement is an example of
supporting the vision of the district at the global level.
Superintendent E described her role in another vision-like way stating that her role was
“Inception, monitoring, and continued guidance. Part of what I do is monitor their growth and
identify ways through which we can support them.” Again, her statement is a different way of
saying she is ensuring that the CTE programs match the vision of the district.
Community relationships. Superintendents saw themselves as working with the
community and industry to create opportunities for all students including ones in CTE.
Superintendent C addressed his role in the community by stating, “in working with the
community, I try to pair up community needs to programs we offer.” Furthermore, he stated,
through partnerships we’re doing it appropriately. For example, I brought in a coder
from Snapchat to come and walk through our epic builds that we were doing at the
elementaries to make sure that this is a good stepping stone.

Superintendent A also discussed his role in building community and business
partnerships saying,
if it’s something that we feel partnerships in our community can help, then I can go in
and people recognize me as the superintendent and making that connection in that cache,
whether its programs that we need for students or job shadowing for example, under CTE
programs, STEM program, et cetera. I see myself in that role when it comes to
advocating for CTE programs in our district.

He saw his role as the representative for the district in developing community relationships and
recognizing that others see him as the face of the district.
Another factor mentioned by superintendents in regard to community and industry
partnerships was that it continues to be a one-way street and somewhat limited. Districts are
seeking out these partnerships but businesses are not necessarily doing the same. Superintendent
60

D summed it up in his statement, “it’s more of a one-way communication. We’re going out,
finding industry saying ‘Look will you support?’ rather than the opposite being true.”
Superintendent B concurred about limited support stating, “Nothing too much with financial or
material. Mostly with advice and cooperation.”
Research Question Two
What Career Technical Education programs have districts supported for
implementation?
When looking at allocation of resources, it is important to look at specific programs
districts support and why they are selected. District administrators, including superintendents,
may look at several factors when determining what programs to implement. First, they need to
evaluate their own programs to determine what they already have in place to support. Second,
one must decide what programs meet the needs of their student population. When looking at the
first two factors, it is important to look at the impact of articulation agreements on student choice
and even specific tools and equipment used within these programs. Finally, district
administrators must determine whether programs should be site-specific or open to all schools in
the district. These factors help determine what CTE programs the district will support for
implementation.
Quantitative Data
When determining CTE programs to implement and support within a district, one must
look at student motivation for taking these classes. Students may choose a course because of
their interest in the content or because there is a pathway to postsecondary education. District
administrators recognized that these agreements may encourage students to take courses aligned
with a postsecondary opportunity. When looking at the data, 59.3% of district administrators
61

strongly agreed and 25.9% agreed that articulation agreements with postsecondary institutions
encouraged students to take CTE courses. Only 14.8% disagreed that these agreements attracted
students to specific programs.
Since administrators believe that articulation agreements encourage students to take CTE
courses, it is important to learn whether CTE programs in administrators’ districts are connected
to postsecondary institutions. When looking at the data, 44.4% strongly agreed and 44.4%
agreed that their district’s CTE programs are articulated with postsecondary institutions. On the
opposite end of the spectrum, 7.4% disagreed and 3.7% strongly disagreed that their district had
articulation agreements in place.
Articulation agreements with postsecondary institutions only tells part of the story when
supporting CTE programs in a district. Administrators must also look at providing equipment
and tools that support industry requirements so that students are competitive in the market.
Survey participants strongly agreed with the previous statement at a rate of 77.8%. Twenty-two
percent of respondents agreed with the importance of using industry equipment and tools. None
of the administrators disagreed with the statement that students should learn using the same
equipment and tools.
With the emphasis on industry standards in equipment and tools, it is important to learn
district administrators’ feelings on industry partnerships in relation to development,
implementation, and support of CTE programs. The data illustrated that 85.2% of those
surveyed strongly agreed with the benefits of industry partners. Another 11.1% agreed with that
assessment while 3.7% disagreed. Table 5 illustrates the data for survey questions related to
CTE courses that districts support for implementation.
62

Table 5
Survey Questions Related to Selection of Career Technical Education Programs for
Implementation

Question
Strongly Disagree
(1)
Disagree
(2)
Agree
(3)
Strongly Agree
(4)
Articulation with
Postsecondary
Institutions
Encourages Students
to Take CTE Courses
2
14.8%
7
25.9%
16
59.3%
CTE Programs in my
District are
Articulated with
Postsecondary
Institutions
1
3.7%
2
7.4%
12
44.4%
12
44.4%
Students Should Learn
Using the Same
Equipment and Tools
that are Being Used in
the Industry
6
22.6%
21
77.8%
Industry Partners are
Beneficial in the
Development,
Implementation, and
Support of CTE
Programs
1
3.7%
3
11.1%
23
85.2%

Qualitative Data
Several themes came out when interviewing superintendents regarding the selection of
CTE programs for implementation. First, superintendents listed the broad range of programs
they had in place in their districts. Second, they discussed the factors involved in selecting
programs. Finally, they discussed the factors associated with where to place those programs. In
other words, the researcher found that superintendents had to decide if programs should be
offered at all sites across the district or limited to one specific site.
63

District CTE Programs. Superintendents had a lot to say in regard to programs they
had in their district. There was a wide variety in the number of programs offered. The number
ranged from 13 to four but all superintendents recognized that implementing new programs was
an ongoing progress. Some of the new programs being implemented by districts include
photovoltaics, cyber-security, and coding. Superintendent B stated that his district had “Thirteen
career pathways ranging from robotics, culinary, and manufacturing.” Other programs
mentioned were cyber-safety, film animation, game technology, computer science, welding,
electrical, athletic training, and solar power. The most popular programs were culinary arts and
robotics with three out of five (60%) offering those programs. Another popular program was
automotive technology with two out of five (40%) districts offering pathways in that area.
Many of these programs had partnerships or articulation agreements that helped them be
successful in their implementation. Superintendent C addressed one of those partnerships with
this statement,
constantly actively looking for partners. For example, our latest is we’re doing the
culinary arts at one of our high schools. So, we are partnering with a local
caterer/restaurant owner with the goal of within 3 to 4 years, we’ll be doing all the in-
house catering with the kids.

Superintendent A discussed his automotive certification program and its partnership with
a Toyota dealer in the area. He stated that they will “come to the school and in-service students
on what they do to make sure that the safety equipment is appropriately stored.” He went on to
say that “we also have invitations to the actual lab at the Toyota dealership. The kids take field
trips over there.” Culinary arts and automotive technology were just two of the examples
mentioned in regard to actual community partnerships.
Selection of CTE courses. There are many options when looking at CTE courses and
superintendents recognized that they needed to be deliberate when deciding which courses to
64

implement. They also acknowledged that some programs had already been in place before they
arrived. Three out of five (60%) affirmed the previous statement with Superintendent C stating
that “some of them were in existence when I came in,” and Superintendent C said some
programs were in existence “based on the assets we had in place.”
While some programs were already in place, superintendents did have the ability to create
new programs. New programs depend on the district but Superintendent C mentioned, “the latest
two are . . . we did just add the culinary arts and Sysco academies.” One factor involved in the
selection was workplace trends and the job market with three out of five (60%) superintendents
mentioning it in their interview. Superintendent B stated that “we look at workforce trends,”
while Superintendent D responded, “the question we asked is, what does the marketplace hold?”
Superintendent A expanded on this idea saying,
we look at the job market and demand through statistics in California. California had
released the most popular or innovative programs that are out there, the high demand for
job market. We focus on some of those into our programs as much as we can.

The focus on job availability was an important factor in determining what CTE programs to
implement and support.
Another factor was the influence of community and advisory groups with three out of
five (60%) superintendents commenting on it in their interview. Superintendent E discussed the
development of their information technology and video production courses by stating, “that’s
through a grant with our consortium and it came from the group, including the principals and
teachers on campus interested in pursuing that model.” Superintendent C supported working
with the community saying that some of their programs were selected “through creating
partnerships, working with our community, seeing where we can form partnerships and needs of
the community.”
65

Finally, two out of five (40%) of superintendents indicated the use of student surveys
when deciding what CTE programs to implement and support. Superintendent D was interested
in student demand responding, “what is student interest? So, we tried to develop courses we
could fill before we make that investment.” Superintendent A was also interested in what
students had to say regarding CTE courses. He stated
We do an annual student survey about what courses they would like to see. A lot of
students don’t know what CTE means, Career and Technical Education. We ask them
what career are you interested in? Part of our survey is starting at the freshmen and
sophomore level, so that as we build the program, we rely on that program to be built to
those students.

Both superintendents’ statements indicated an emphasis on a service model and ensuring that the
district is meeting the demand of their clientele.
Where to implement CTE courses throughout a district. Since there are many CTE
opportunities available, superintendents must make decisions about where programs should be
implemented. Superintendents must decide whether to offer programs across the district at each
site or focus different programs on different sites. Superintendents were consistent with five out
of five (100%) believing that programs are usually going to be developed at the site level with
the support of the district. Superintendent D said CTE programs are “driven by site personality.
It’s not me that says you should do photovoltaics. You go out and do the work, do the surveys.
What might work for here might not work for there.” Superintendent E concurred, “It is really
based upon the schools themselves and what their capacity is. What will flourish at which
school really depends upon which school wants it.” Superintendent B agreed but also included
the district office in the process stating, “The school has a lot of say in what CTE programs are
offered but it’s really a matter of helping each school identify its own strengths that they can
expand and grow on.” Superintendent A agreed in regard to hiring CTE teachers “it’s a district-
66

to-school partnership that we have – hand in hand. We’re both responsible for doing that.”
Superintendent A also agreed with focusing one’s resources, “We decided to invest in one or two
major programs at each school site so we could better support the schools and the students
there.” When deciding where to implement CTE programs, superintendents agreed that it is
driven at the site level with a level of support from the district office.
Research Question Three
What resources do districts allocate to support Career Technical Education programs?
Career Technical Education programs need resources from the district office in order to
develop and be successful. District administrators have a variety of options when determining
funding sources for programs within the district. These options include LCFF/LCAP, grants,
bonds, and Perkins grants. Some of these funds are tied specifically to CTE while others can be
used to fund programs deemed important to the vision of the district. This section includes a
discussion of administrators’ attitudes towards financial resources and human capital in regard to
CTE programs. Additionally, it will look at specific funding sources for CTE courses such as
grant money, bond money, LCAP funding, and Perkins grants. Finally, superintendents’ role in
allocating resources, providing support, and hiring will be discussed.
Quantitative Data
District administrators saw the importance of allocating financial resources in support of
effective CTE programs. Survey information indicated that 88.9% of district administrators
strongly agreed and 11.1% agreed with the previous statement. None of those surveyed
disagreed or strongly disagreed with that statement. It is evident that district administrators see
the need for money in supporting CTE programs.
67

In regard to human capital, district administrators understand the importance of hiring
competent staff to support effective CTE programs. When asked to agree or disagree with the
investment of resources into human capital, district administrators strongly agreed at a rate of
85.2% and agreed at a rate of 14.8%. Since no participants strongly disagreed or disagreed, it is
clear that district administrators understand the importance of human capital in regard to
effective CTE programs.
Districts use a variety of funding to support CTE programs. One such source of funding
is the use of grant money. In regard to using grant money, 88.9% of respondents strongly agreed
that their district uses it. Another 7.4% agreed that their district uses grant money while 3.7%
strongly disagreed with the statement. No district administrator disagreed with the statement
relating to the use of grant money.
Another source of funding for CTE programs is the use of bond money. Bond measures
are designed to raise money so that school districts can finance large-scale projects such as
construction or implementation of technology. These measures are put on the ballot by LEA’s to
be approved or defeated by the public. There was some inconsistency as to how district
administrators responded to the use of bond money in that 51.9% strongly disagreed that it was
used; 7.4% disagreed that bond money was used to fund CTE programs in their district. On the
other hand, 29.6% strongly agreed and 11.1% agreed that bond money was used in their district
to fund CTE programs.
An additional source of funding is the LCFF/LCAP. When asked about the use of these
types of funds in their district, 59.3% strongly agreed that their district uses this resource and
25.9% agreed. Alternatively, 3.7% disagreed and 11.1% strongly disagreed that LCFF/LCAP
funds were used in support of CTE programs.
68

Finally, district administrators were asked whether their districts used Perkins funds to
support CTE programs. The Perkins Act of 2006 provides over $1.5 billion dollars nationally for
CTE funding. States allocate those resources to LEAs based on guidelines established by the
Perkins Act. In response, 92.6% strongly agreed that Perkins funds were used to support CTE
programs. Another 3.7% agreed that Perkins funds were used while 3.7% strongly disagreed that
they were used (see Table 6).

Table 6
Resources Districts Allocate to Support Career Technical Education Programs

Question
Strongly Disagree
(1)
Disagree
(2)
Agree
(3)
Strongly Agree
(4)
To Have an Effective
CTE Program,
Financial Resources
Must be Allocated
3
11.1%
24
88.9%
To have an Effective
CTE Program,
Resources Must be
Invested in Human
Capital
4
14.8%
23
85.2%
My District uses Grant
Money to Fund CTE
Programs
1
3.7%
2
7.4%
24
88.9%
My District uses Bond
Money to Fund CTE
Programs
14
51.9%
2
7.4%
3
11.1%
8
29.6%
My District uses
LCFF/LCAP Funding
to Fund CTE
Programs
3
11.1%
1
3.7%
7
25.9%
16
59.3%
My District uses
Perkins Funds to Fund
CTE Programs
1
3.7%
1
3.7%
25
92.6%

69

Qualitative Data
Districts have many resources they can allocate in support of CTE programs. Often,
resources are understood to be money but they can be different types of support. For example,
partnering with sites to ensure CTE courses are A-G compliant or even monitoring program
effectiveness would be forms of support that do not specifically involve money. During
interviews, superintendents mentioned the many monetary supports used for CTE
implementation but they also discussed different levels of support that were not necessarily
specifically tied to money. This support encompasses partnerships, program monitoring, and
hiring practices. Superintendents believed that all levels of support contributed to successful
CTE programs.
Monetary resources. Superintendents discussed using three main funding sources when
implementing CTE programs with the first being the use of grants. The primary source of
money is LCAP/LCFF and general funds. When asked, four out of five (80%) of
superintendents used this as the primary source of funding before supplementing CTE courses
with other grants and bonds. Superintendent A mentioned using “the CTE block grant as well as
youth LCAP monies to concentrate on CTE programs.” Superintendent D stated “we’ll use the
heck out of all the state funding we can get our hands on, but we’ll always back fill with general
fund dollars if the program is successful.” Superintendent B agreed saying, “We have the same
resources everyone else has. You start with that base.” Before looking at bonds and grants,
superintendents use their LCFF/LCAP and general fund dollars to support CTE courses.
Superintendents also looked for additional ways to fund their CTE programs. Three out
of five (60%) interviewees mentioned that grants were an important source of funding for CTE
programs. Superintendent C stated, “we’re pretty creative, so we go for outside money, grants.”
70

Superintendent D also pursued grants, saying “Over the last 4 or 5 years the state has actually
started to give a lot of that one-time money. We’ve been able to use that surge of one-time
money to basically give the startup costs for these programs.” Superintendent D agreed with the
use of grant money, “we use outside grant money to supplement LCFF supplemental and
concentration grant dollars.” Superintendents appear to be creative in securing additional
funding for their CTE programs.
Superintendents also mentioned the use of bond money when discussing funding for CTE
programs. When interviewed, three out of five (60%) superintendents specifically talked about
the use of bond money to support CTE. Superintendent B revealed that his district was able “to
go after a zero-interest bond sale that’s going to be targeted specifically at Career Tech Ed.
Through the bond, we’ve been able to build specific facilities that allow the CTE programs to
advance.” Superintendent D agreed with the use of bonds and addressed matching funds stating,
we just passed a bond and the state is offering significant matching funds for CTE. A lot
of our new building, new construction, we’re doing will have a CTE wing on it. We’re
going to have this additional six million dollars, we’d better make use of it.

Superintendent B talked about an extensive technology bond in his district declaring,
we passed a bond in 2012 that we refer to as our Technology Bond, Measure S. It really
was to upgrade technology that would help enable 21st century teaching and learning and
CTE. We have several hundred thousand dollars each time we sell a series of Measure S
bonds, which is every 5 years, we get a new infusion of cash into the CTE program. And
so, that will continue to generate funds for another 25 years so we’re in pretty good shape
regarding that.

The majority of superintendents used bonds extensively to support the implementation of CTE
programs.
Non-Monetary Support. When looking at implementing CTE programs, it is often
assumed that monetary support is the primary means in which superintendents provide support.
In their interviews, superintendents mentioned many concepts that did not necessarily involve
71

money. The first concept is that of a partnership between sites and the district office.
Partnerships were identified by four out of five superintendents when looking at ways in which
CTE courses are supported. Superintendent A partnered with his sites by going “through a
realignment of our courses so that our kids can receive college credit (A-G) and not just get an
elective class credit that doesn’t help them.” Superintendent D saw the partnership in a different
way saying, “we also have to provide a program and more than just ink, pen, and eraser. If we’re
doing photovoltaic, we need to buy a full photovoltaic electronic system that they can build,
connect, put up, that type of thing.” Superintendent E saw her level of support as making sure
“that we aligned resources so that those who are the teachers in any particular pathway share a
common prep, so that they can better support students and do their planning.” A significant
number of superintendents saw their support as being a partnership between the district and sites.
Another non-monetary way of supporting CTE programs was identified during interviews
with superintendents. Two out of five (40%) superintendents saw their role monitoring and
helping to grow programs. Superintendent E stated that her role was to “monitor the program
and continue the dialogue about what we can do to make the program better.” Superintendent B
felt similarly saying his role was “Mostly being a partner. Planning, feedback, and analysis of
the program. Asking what if questions.” Nearly a majority of the superintendents interviewed
identified monitoring programs as necessary.
Finally, superintendents used hiring practices to support CTE programs. Superintendents
were consistent in whom they saw as the key factor in hiring CTE teachers. Five out of five
(100%) listed the principal as being part of the team that hires teachers. While each
superintendent mentioned Directors of Secondary Education, Classified Directors, Assistant
Superintendents of Administrative Services, and members of advisory boards, principals were
72

the key person that all of them had in common. Superintendent D summed it up the best saying,
“I’m a big believer of site-based management. The principal is going to own and really needs to
drive the hiring process.” Superintendents agreed that the principal is the driving force behind
CTE hires.
Research Question Four
What types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in
improving college- and career-readiness?
As CTE programs are implemented, it is important to identify whether they are serving
the needs of students. As mentioned previously, superintendents monitor programs so they can
allocate resources where necessary. This section will look at district administrators’ beliefs on
data as well as their thoughts on industry partnerships. Additionally, data will be presented in
relation to articulation agreements and internship opportunities since each might provide
feedback to district administrators. Finally, information from superintendent interviews will
identify how CTE programs prepare students, which ones are effective, and how their
effectiveness is determined. Preparedness, effectiveness, and determination of effectiveness will
all be viewed through the lens of college- and career-readiness.
Quantitative Data
Districts have existing CTE programs and are constantly looking at allocating resources
for new programs that might meet the needs of their students. When asked if they make data-
driven decisions regarding CTE program development, district administrators strongly agreed at
a rate of 85.2%. Another 14.8% agreed that it was important to focus on data when making
decisions. No district administrators strongly disagreed or disagreed with the importance of
using data.
73

District administrators have already mentioned the need for data to make decisions in
regard to CTE programs. One way to get data on the effectiveness of CTE programs is to solicit
feedback from industry partners. District administrators strongly agreed (85.2%) with the need
for industry partners. Furthermore, 11.1% of district administrators agreed that industry partners
were beneficial in the support of CTE programs. Only 3.7% of district administrators disagreed
that industry partners were important in regard to effective CTE programs.
Another factor for district administrators to examine is articulation agreements with
postsecondary institutions. In order to look at articulation agreements in regard to program
effectiveness, districts need to have them in place. Participants (44.4%) strongly agreed that their
CTE programs are articulated with postsecondary institutions. Another 44.4% agreed with the
statement while 7.4% disagreed and 3.7% strongly disagreed.
One more way to gather data for CTE program effectiveness would be to gather data
from students with internship opportunities. Again, internship opportunities must be available if
you want to pull data from them. According to district administrators, internship opportunities
were more varied in their districts; 25.9% strongly agreed that internship opportunities were
available in their district. Another 33.9% agreed while 33.9% disagreed and 7.4% strongly
disagreed that there were internship opportunities in their districts (see Table 7).

74

Table 7
Areas that Provide Data to Determine Effectiveness of CTE Programs

Question
Strongly Disagree
(1)
Disagree
(2)
Agree
(3)
Strongly Agree
(4)
It is Important to
Make Data Driven
Decisions
Regarding CTE
Programs
4
14.8%
23
85.2%
Industry Partners
are Beneficial in the
Development,
Implementation,
and Support of CTE
Programs
1
3.7%
3
11.1%
23
85.2%
CTE Programs in
my District are
Articulated with
Postsecondary
Institutions
1
3.7%
2
7.4%
12
44.4%
12
44.4%
There are Internship
Opportunities
Available to CTE
Students in my
District
2
7.4%
9
33.3%
9
33.3%
7
25.9%

Qualitative Data
Superintendents should make decisions regarding allocation of resources for all programs
in their district. As with all district programs, superintendents may consider a program’s
effectiveness when determining how many resources they should dedicate to it. The data in this
section in divided into three parts: How CTE programs prepare students to be college- and
career-ready, types of effective CTE programs, and how CTE programs are deemed effective.
How CTE programs prepare students for college and career. Superintendents
manage large numbers of programs within their districts and must make decisions as to
75

allocation of resources for each program. One factor that may contribute to whether a program
receives resources may be effectiveness. When looking at CTE programs, one should question
how programs prepare students to be college- and career-ready. When responding to that
question, three out of five (60 %) superintendents mentioned the idea that A-G coursework must
be a part of the CTE program. For example, Superintendent E stated “from the level of rigor, our
CTE students may also be our A-G students. It’s not one or the other.” Superintendent C agreed
saying “we infuse the A thru G throughout everybody.” Superintendent D expanded further
offering
I think the key to our CTE vision is college- and career-ready. In other words, whatever
students make it through our CTE pathways, will be able to meet all other A through G
coursework and have the ability to go onto a 4-year institution, if they choose. It’s about
choices.

The majority of superintendents agreed that college- and career-readiness (A-G) was an effective
way of judging whether CTE programs were preparing students for postsecondary opportunities.
Another way to judge CTE program effectiveness is whether students are ready for career
opportunities when they finish pathways. Two out of five (40%) superintendents discussed real-
world applications and skills in determining program effectiveness. Superintendent E observed
that CTE programs prepare their students through “real-world applications and the certifications
allow them to be prepared for some of those career opportunities.” Superintendent B added that
CTE programs
teach a content, which is obviously helpful. They also teach in a way that simulates a
workplace where the kids have to get along with each other and manage projects and be
on time. All those soft work place skills. And it’s very hands on.

Real-world applications and skills attainment are two important factors in judging effective CTE
programs.
76

Types of effective CTE programs. Once you have determined what makes an effective
program, it is important to determine the types of programs that have proven successful in
improving college- and career-readiness. One factor highlighted by two out of five (40%)
superintendents is classes that naturally connect their program with academics. Superintendent
A focused on “our Project Lead the Way. If there’s any program that we feel has been
successful, it’s Project Lead the Way because it’s rigorous, it’s challenging, it’s got our kids into
colleges.” Superintendent C had this to say, “I think the ones you can intertwine with the
academics. So clearly the coding, the engineering, even the medical. We have quite a few that
would tend to go hand in hand.” As superintendents mentioned, it is crucial to link your CTE
program to academics so they are supporting each other across the curriculum.
A different perspective on effective programs comes from other superintendent
interviews. Two out of five (40%) superintendents referred to certifications when determining
program effectiveness. In other words, students would be ready to enter the workforce after
completing a pathway if they so choose. Superintendent D stated
The biggest, the most effective draw is functionality. For example, we just started a
photovoltaic course, which is solar. After the course certification, they can immediately
go and work for the solar industry. I think the kids have to be able to see that if I finish
this coursework, I do get my certification, I can go into the workforce; there will be jobs.

Superintendent E was similar in her response,
Courses will be aligned with the certifications and the curriculum within CTE, and the
target. That will allow students who are interested to connect better with the subject
matter, with the career opportunity to help identify that goal earlier, and perhaps motivate
them more.

According to these superintendents, their most effective CTE programs were those that prepared
students to walk out of their programs and into a job.
77

How superintendents determine if their CTE programs are effective. Finally,
superintendents responded to how they determine whether their CTE programs are effective in
preparing students for college and career. Two major themes came out of the data. The first
theme was looking at how students advance after leaving district CTE programs. Three out of
five (60%) superintendents identified advancement as the primary determinant of whether their
CTE programs were preparing students for college and career. Superintendent B responded,
“Acceptance rates into the university and certification programs,” when discussing effectiveness
of college- and career-preparedness. Superintendent D stated, “it’s the sum of the result. Are
they going to college or are they going into career?” Superintendent C agreed “I think looking at
the statistics on the number of kids that are advancing. It’s kind of self-reported so we probably
need to do a better job on statistics and staying in touch with our graduates in general.” A
majority of superintendents agreed that it is relatively easy to quantify the successfulness of CTE
programs.
The second theme involved internships providing data on the success of CTE programs.
The data showed that two out of five (40%) superintendents mentioned internships as a source in
determining whether CTE programs were effective in preparing students for college and career.
Superintendent B discussed internships, “Feedback from those people says that the kids are
prepared. They come ready for work. I think a lot of information from outsiders’ experience on
interacting with our students through competitions, through internships, and the like.” Each of
the superintendents agreed that internships were a way to determine if CTE programs were
effective in their goal of preparing students for college and career.

78

Discussion
Superintendents saw their role in regard to CTE programs as mostly visionary. Bolman
and Deal (2003) discussed symbolic leaders as communicating a vision of the future that is
persuasive and hopeful as well as addressing the challenges of their followers. Superintendents
employ that role in regard to sharing the vision for CTE programs that are operating within their
district. They are involved as they are with all district programs but they manage key people that
do the specific work related to implementing the programs. They are tasked with developing the
vision in conjunction with the Board of Education and they ensure that the programs receive
resources and are being run successfully. They also make recommendations as to where they
may look to grow in CTE programs. It is important that they recognize where growth is needed
so that programs can be developed that are beneficial to students.
Developing partnerships with industry was a challenge because it was a one-way street in
regards to getting students involved. Since superintendents are the face of the district, they need
to continue seeking out partnerships so that CTE students can benefit in the job market. If it’s
seen as a one-sided, school districts need to do a better job of publicizing what their students are
doing so that industry can take notice. It is crucial that superintendents highlight their CTE
programs so that community and industry recognize that students are coming out of high school
ready for the workforce.
Superintendents were deliberate in determining the what and where of CTE programs.
With so many programs available, it is readily apparent that superintendents do research before
implementation. While discussing organizational process, Bolman and Deal (2003) discussed
the importance of planning as an organization so that you are not rudderless, shortsighted, and
reactive. Superintendents take that to heart by using important data to justify the programs that
79

are implemented. Looking at job trends ensures that you are truly preparing your students for
college and careers. Superintendents also mentioned working with community and advisory
groups to determine what to offer. Again, this an effective strategy to provide options that will
help students in the future. One limitation of this strategy is the changing job market. If there
are changes, districts may be stuck with equipment that is outdated and not useful to students.
In regard to implementing CTE programs at multiple sites, limiting programs to specific
schools gives districts the ability to focus resources to support that program. This ensures that
districts aren’t stretched thin trying to support the same program at different sites. Additionally,
it is important to allow sites to focus on programs that mirror their school’s personality.
Principals know their staff and the programs that would work at their site. Marzano, Walters and
McNulty (2005) discussed the principal’s responsibility of developing a shared vision for the
school and this vision allows the principal to get buy-in from the staff. Superintendents in this
study appear to follow the lead of Marzano et al. (2005) in allowing their principals to provide
vision for their school and implement programs that fit their personality. One issue that may
arise would come with retirements of key teachers involved in successful programs.
Superintendents are constantly looking for ways to find resources to support their CTE
programs. When Governor Jerry Brown signed the LCFF into law, California essentially
eliminated most funding categories and gave districts more discretion in funding different
educational programs (Taylor, 2013). Superintendents have used this freedom to fund CTE
programs that meet the needs of their student population. Additionally, they have looked to
other funding sources to supplement their CTE programs. Superintendents have used their
stature in the community to persuade voters to pass bonds that support many programs including
CTE. Also, superintendents have used grants in funding CTE programs. Only one
80

superintendent specifically mentioned Perkins Grants but since the interview question about
grants made no mention of Perkins it is likely that superintendents were referring to Perkins
Grants when discussing that specific question. All the funding sources mentioned give
superintendents options when determining how to support CTE programs.
Superintendents also saw themselves as supporting CTE programs in a non-monetary
way. Some of the primary ways that superintendents identified were in partnering with sites,
monitoring programs, and hiring staff. Partnerships were described in different ways including
alignment of course outlines and alignment of prep periods for particular pathways but they all
were focused on improving CTE programs for students. Superintendents also saw monitoring as
an important aspect of supporting CTE programs because providing feedback and analysis is
important to the development of all programs including CTE. Superintendents were also clear
about who was instrumental in the hiring process. All allowed principals to have a major
influence in the hiring of CTE teachers. Since principals know the needs and culture of their
campus, it is important that they are the primary decision maker in this process.
District administrators including superintendents understand that their CTE programs are
preparing students to be college- and career-ready. Superintendents look at A-G passage rates to
determine if their CTE programs are effectively completing that task. They also have worked to
make CTE courses A-G eligible or establish scheduling options so that students can remain A-G
eligible while completing CTE pathways.
Superintendents also were clear in listing the qualities associated with effective CTE
programs. One quality was ensuring that CTE programs were intertwined with rigorous
academic programs. The second quality was getting certifications in place so that students could
81

see the benefits of completing CTE pathways. According to superintendents, seeing the benefits
of completing a CTE pathway encourages more students to enroll.
Finally, superintendents recounted two major themes in regard to measuring CTE
programs’ overall effectiveness. First, one must look at advancement numbers for students
completing CTE pathways. In other words, what percentage of students are moving on to a
postsecondary education program whether its college or job related. Second, feedback from
student internships gives data in regard to how our students are prepared. This data can help
administrators determine if CTE programs are being effective in preparing their students.
Chapter Five follows with a summary of the research study including conclusions and
implications.

82

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS
College- and career-readiness is an important factor in today’s educational system. It is
not enough to only prepare students academically; schools must also provide instruction in
technical and employability/soft skills. Before the introduction of the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS, California Department of Education, 2016c), postsecondary institutions
reported that graduating high school students did not possess the necessary skills to be successful
in college or careers (Kendall, 2011). In response, schools began using CTE programs to teach
college- and career-readiness skills. Since many of these CTE programs lacked the rigor of
college preparatory coursework, it is crucial that district administrators allocate resources and
evaluate their effectiveness as they move forward. With the introduction of the LCFF, LEA’s
have the flexibility to spend money in areas that benefit their students. Districts have also been
creative in developing additional funding sources for their CTE programs to address student
needs. District administrators have acknowledged the shift to college- and career-readiness and
made adjustments in resource allocation for their CTE programs.
Statement of the Problem
The problem is that high school students are not graduating with college- and career-
readiness skills. According to the California Department of Education (CDE, 2016b), only
43.4% of graduates during the 2014-2015 school year completed all coursework required for
University of California and/or California State University admission. This coursework is
commonly referred to as A-G requirements and refers to the classes that make students eligible
for admission to University of California and California State University schools. The
requirements include three years of college-preparatory social science, four years of college-
preparatory English, three years of college preparatory math, two years of a laboratory science,
83

two years of a foreign language, one year of a visual and performing art, and one year of a
college-preparatory elective (Regents of the University of California, 2015). Additionally, in
regard to career readiness, research has shown that high school graduates have not consistently
met standards set by employers in the areas of attendance, teamwork, and work habits (Bangser,
2008).
In order to develop effective Career Technical Education programs to address college-
and career-readiness, resources must be allocated to the development of successful Career
Technical Education programs. With the introduction of the Local Control Funding Formula
(LCFF), districts have greater discretion in how they allocate their resources. While their
spending must fall into one of eight categories and align with the Local Education Agency’s
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), districts can develop interventions geared to their
district’s specific needs. It is imperative that resources are allocated in a manner that is aligned
with effective college- and career-readiness programs that have proven effective and line up with
student needs.
Purpose of the Study
This study sought to examine the role of district administrators in allocating resources
and developing effective Career Technical Education (CTE) programs. This study also analyzed
the resources allocated by districts to support the implementation of CTE programs to improve
college- and career-readiness. Convenience/purposeful sampling was used for the study. It was
conducted using a mixed-methods approach including qualitative and quantitative methods.
Qualitative information was collected through interviews; quantitative data was comprised of a
Likert-style survey.

84

Research Questions
This study concentrated on the following research questions:
1. What is the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education
programs to support college- and career-readiness?
2. What Career Technical Education programs have districts supported for implementation?
3. What resources do districts allocate to support Career Technical Education programs?
4. What types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in
improving college- and career-readiness?
Summary of Findings
In regard to research question one, district administrators understood the importance of
CTE programs in regard to preparing students to be college- and career-ready. District
administrators are any district personnel that are involved in making CTE decisions and included
superintendents, assistant superintendents, directors, assistant directors, and coordinators.
District administrators saw the importance of knowing CTE standards and making data-driven
decisions regarding their CTE programs. The researcher found that the data provided also
supported their understanding of the importance of resources, both financial and human. Survey
data gathered illustrated the importance district administrators place on industry partners,
articulation agreements, and internship opportunities. Survey questions provided in this study
demonstrated the importance that district administrators placed on CTE programs.
Superintendents supported the importance of CTE programs in relation to college- and
career-readiness. While superintendents mainly saw themselves in a visionary role in regard to
CTE programs, they also recognized their role as the face of the district. Superintendents talked
at length about their role in building community relationships and using those connections to
85

establish partnerships to support their CTE programs. It was supported by the data that those
partnerships could be used to develop internships for CTE students.
Research question number two addressed the CTE programs that districts supported for
implementation. Survey data found the use of articulation agreements with postsecondary
institutions. District administrators believed that articulation agreements encouraged students to
take CTE courses and felt that their districts had articulation agreements in place with
postsecondary organizations. In regard to financial support, district administrators
overwhelmingly believed that investments should be made to provide the same equipment and
tools being used in industry. Additionally, district administrators believed industry partners were
beneficial in the development, implementation, and support of CTE programs. When decisions
are being made about implementing and supporting CTE programs, district administrators agreed
about the importance of articulation agreements, industry standard equipment, and industry
partnerships.
Superintendents mentioned a number of factors in relation to which CTE programs they
support for implementation. First, superintendents discussed the number of programs in their
district. The programs ranged in number from 13 to four and included automotive technology,
culinary arts, video production, and construction technology. Superintendents also believed in
continuing to develop new programs that met the needs of their students. Second,
superintendents addressed the selection of CTE courses for implementation by placing an
emphasis on workplace trends and the job market. Superintendents looked to community and
advisory groups for guidance in regard to programs needed. Superintendents surveyed their
students to determine course interest. Third, superintendents made decisions as to what sites
would implement what CTE program. They agreed that it was important to understand each
86

school’s personality and let that drive the site’s CTE programs. Superintendents took a variety
of factors into account when determining what CTE programs to support and where.
Research question three focused on the types of resources districts allocated to support
CTE programs. District administrators agreed in the importance of allocating financial resources
and investing in human capital. District administrators also agreed that their districts used a
variety of funding sources including LCFF/LCAP, grants, and Perkins funds when allocating
resources for CTE programs. There was disagreement about the use of bond money to fund CTE
programs. A majority of district administrators strongly disagreed that their district used bond
money in the support of CTE programs. District administrators were in agreement in the
importance of resources and the variety of funding sources used except for bond money.
Superintendents’ responses fell into two categories in regard to types of resources
allocated to support CTE programs. The first category was monetary resources which included
LCAP/LCFF, general funds, grants, and bond money. Superintendents mentioned a combination
of sources to support CTE programs. The second category was non-monetary resources which
included district/site partnerships, program monitoring, and hiring practices. District/site
partnership included realigning courses so that CTE classes meet A-G requirements and/or
aligning teacher preps so that similar CTE teachers can discuss student progress. Program
monitoring referred to planning, feedback, and analysis of the program so that programs can be
improved so that they meet student needs. Hiring practices were discussed in the context of
including principals in the process since they know the needs of their site.
Research question four concentrated on the types of CTE programs that have proven to
be effective in improving college- and career-readiness. District administrators agreed with
several factors when looking at these programs. They agreed in the importance of making data-
87

driven decisions while including industry partners in the development, implementation, and
support of CTE programs. Additionally, district administrators agreed that CTE programs in
their district were articulated with postsecondary institutions and the availability of internships.
All of the factors identified help determine whether specific CTE programs are effective in
college- and career-readiness.
Superintendent interviews highlighted three factors that were analyzed when determining
a CTE program’s effectiveness in improving college- and career-readiness. First,
superintendents discussed how CTE programs prepare students for college- and career.
Superintendents believed that A-G coursework should be part of the CTE programs so
participants are addressing both their college- and career-needs. They also added that it was
important to determine whether students are ready for career opportunities when they finish a
pathway.
Second, superintendents discussed types of effective CTE programs. Superintendents
believed that CTE programs that were associated with strong academics and rigor were more
effective than others. Superintendents believed that a strong certification program made a
program effective. It was supported by the superintendents that certifications allowed students to
directly enter the workforce made a program effective.
Third, superintendents considered two factors to determine if their CTE programs are
effective. Districts must look at the end result of whether students are going to college or
directly into the workforce. The data supported districts in understanding the effectiveness of
their CTE programs. Also, information can be provided by district internships. Feedback from
internship partners can be used to determine if the program is effective in preparing students for
the workforce.
88

Implications
The findings associated with this study identified factors that district administrators and
superintendents considered when determining how to allocate resources in support of effective
CTE programs. The conclusions can be useful to current district administrators and
superintendents because they provide insight into factors that must be contemplated when
determining what programs to support.
Although each of the study’s participants works in a different type of district, the
strategies identified in relation to determining effective CTE programs can be useful to any
district administrator or superintendent. The researcher found the study provided useful
information in regard to funding sources for CTE programs. Each of these factors would help
district administrators make conscientious decisions about their CTE programs.
The study found that the importance of articulation agreements and internships were
beneficial. This research found that districts develop the program but struggle to get these
important partnerships in place. The information provided by superintendents in relation to
establishing partnerships is an important factor in harnessing the power of CTE programs. It was
found in this study that when students can leave school with a certification in place, students
have given themselves a powerful opportunity for their future. Lessons learned by the study
participants will help administrators moving forward with CTE programs in their district.
Limitations
This study includes the following limitations:
1. The number of school districts offering Career Technical Education programs and their
geographic location will limit access for the researchers.
89

2. The ability to gain access to district administrators to collect information. District
administrators have busy schedules and may not have the time to fill out a survey or be
interviewed.
3. The ability and/or willingness of district administrators to provide accurate responses.
Recommendations for Future Study
Although many important findings in regard to allocation of resources for CTE programs
came out of this study, several suggestions for future research were determined:
1. Further research should be done regarding the correlation between effectiveness of CTE
programs and amount of resources.
2. Because of the limited amount of business partnerships, research should be done on how
partnerships are developed, maintained, and mined for resources.
3. Further research on effect of student pathway completion. Data showing postsecondary
choices and completion rate following CTE pathway completion would help determine if
certain CTE programs are more effective than others.
Conclusion
The introduction of Common Core standards has created a culture where high school
graduates are expected to be college- and career-ready. With this shift, LEA’s have had to
implement CTE programs that prepare students for careers while maintaining opportunities for
A-G completion. District administrators and superintendents have had to make decisions in
regards to allocation of resources for CTE programs. Factors to consider have been effectiveness
of programs as well as what sites where implementation could be effective. Data needs to be
analyzed to determine what types of programs to offer. It is crucial that district administrators
90

and superintendents allocate resources in support of programs that are academically rigorous and
meet the needs of the ever-changing job market.

91

References
Achieve, Inc. (2011). Closing the expectations gap. Retrieved from http://www.achieve.org/files/
AchieveClosingtheExpectationsGap2011.pdf
Affeldt, J. T. (2015). New accountability in California through local control funding reforms:
The promise and the gaps. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(23), 1-20.
An, B. P. (2013a). The impact of dual enrollment on college degree attainment: Do low-SES
students benefit?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(1), 57-75.
An, B. P. (2013b). The influence of dual enrollment on academic performance and college
readiness: Differences by socioeconomic status. Research in Higher Education, 54(4),
407-432.
Bae, S., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Recognizing college- and career-readiness in the
California school accountability system. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity
Policy in Education.
Bangser, M. (2008). Preparing high school students for successful transitions to postsecondary
education and employment. Issue Brief. Washington, DC: National High School Center.
Barnes, W., Slate, J. R., & Rojas-LeBouef, A. (2010). College-readiness and academic
preparedness: The same concepts?. Current Issues in Education, 13(4).
Bell, T. H. (1993). Reflections one decade after a nation at risk. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(8), 592.
Betts, J. R., Young, S. M., Zau, A. C., & Bachofer, K. V. (2016). College prep for all, Part II.
Retrieved from https://sandera.ucsd.edu/research-and-publications/College%20Prep%
20Part%20II.pdf
Bloom, T. (2010). College- and career-readiness: A systemic P-20 response. Arlington, VA:
Naviance.
92

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brand, B., Valent, A., & Browning, A. (2013). How career and technical education can help
students be college- and career-ready: A primer. Washington, DC: College- and career-
Readiness and Success Center at American Institutes for Research.
Bush, G. W. (2001). No child left behind. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/nclb/overview/
intro/execsumm.pdf
California Department of Education. (n.d.). Career technical education. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct
California Department of Education, CDE. (2010). Multiple pathways to student success:
Envisioning the new California high school. Retrieved from
https://www.wested.org/resources/multiple-pathways-to-student-success/
California Department of Education, CDE. (2013). California career technical education model
curriculum standards. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/sf/documents/
ctestdfrontpages.pdf
California Department of Education, CDE. (2015a). LCFF frequently asked questions. Retrieved
from http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/lcfffaq.asp
California Department of Education, CDE. (2015b). Local control funding formula overview.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/lcffoverview.asp
California Department of Education, CDE. (2016a). State priority related resources. Retrieved
from www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/statepriorityresources.asp

93

California Department of Education. (2016b). 12th grade graduates completing all courses
required for U.C. and/or C.S.U. entrance. Retrieved from http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
stgradnum.asp?cChoice=StGrdEth2&cYear=1993- 94&ProgramName=All&cTopic=
Graduates&cLevel=State&myTimeFrame=S
California Department of Education. (2016c). Common core state standards. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/
California Department of Education. (2017). Career technical education model curriculum
standards. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/sf/ctemcstandards.asp
California Legislative Analyst. (2013). Updated: An overview of the local control funding
formula. Retrieved from http://http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2013/edu/lcff/lcff-
072913.pdf
California Legislative Information. (2017). California education code. Retrieved from
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=51228&l
awCode=EDC
California Teacher’s Association. (2017). Local Control Funding Formula q &a. Retrieved
from http://www.cta.org/en/Issues-and-Action/School-Funding/Local-Control-Funding-
Formula/LCFF-Q-and-A.aspx
Callan, P. M., Finney, J. E., Kirst, M. W., Usdan, M. D., & Venezia, A. (2006). Claiming
common ground: State policymaking for improving college readiness and success.
(National Center Report No. 06-1). San Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and
Higher Education.
94

Carl D. Perkins CTE Improvement Act of 2006. (2006). Public Law 109-270 to amend the Carl
D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998 to improve the Act.
Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/109/plaws/publ270/PLAW-109publ270.pdf
Castellano, M. E., Richardson, G. B., Sundell, K., & Stone, J. R. (2015). Preparing students for
college- and career-in the United States: The effects of career-themed programs of study
on high school performance. Vocations and Learning, 1-24.
Castellano, M., Stringfield, S., & Stone, J. R., III. (2003). Secondary career and technical
education and comprehensive school reform: Implications for research and practice.
Review of Educational Research, 73(2), 231-272.
Conley, D. T. (2012). A complete definition of college- and career-readiness. Retrieved from
http://www.avid.org/dl/eve_natcon/nc12_four_keys_handout2.pdf
Conley, D. T. (2014, spring). New conceptions of college- and career-ready: A profile approach
to admission. Journal of College Admission, (223).
Conley, D. T., & McGaughy, C. (2012). College- and career-readiness: Same or different.
Educational Leadership, 69(7), 28-34.
Conley, D. T., Drummond, K. V., de Gonzalez, A., Rooseboom, J., & Stout, O. (2011). Reaching
the goal: The applicability and importance of the common core state standards to
college- and career-readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center
(NJ1). Retrieved from http://www.ccrscenter.org/products-resources/resource-
database/reaching-goal-applicability-and-importance-common-core-state
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Strategies for qualitative data analysis. Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
95

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed method research
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., & Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college- and
career-readiness: Developing a new paradigm. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
22(86). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n86.2014
DiBenedetto, C. A., & Myers, B. E. (2016). A conceptual model for the study of student
readiness in the 21st century. NACTA Journal, 60(1a), 28-35.
Friedel, J. N. (2011). Where has vocational education gone? The impact of federal legislation on
the expectations, design, and function of vocational education as reflected in the
reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins career and technical education act of 2006.
American Educational History Journal, 38(1/2), 37.
Gardner, D. P. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: The National Commission on
Excellence in Education, US Department of Education. Retrieved from http://teacher
tenure.procon.org/sourcefiles/a-nation-at-risk-tenure-april-1983.pdf
Helguera, M. (2018). The allocation of resources for career technical education programs that
improve college- and career-readiness (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Hill, L., Warren, P., Murphy, P., Ugo, I., & Pathak, A. (2016). Special education finance in
California. Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from: www.ppic.org/
content/pubs/report/R_1116LHR.pdf
96

Karp, M. M., & Hughes, K. L. (2008). Study: Dual enrollment can benefit a broad range of
students. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers (J1), 83(7), 14-17.
Kazis R. (2005). Remaking career and technical education for the 21st century: What role for the
high school programs. Boston, MA: Jobs for the Future.
Kendall, J. S. (2011). Understanding common core state standards. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
King, S. B., & West, D. (2009). Statewide articulation agreements between high schools and
community college career and technical programs. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 33(6), 527-532.
Koppich, J. E., Humphrey, D. C., & Marsh, J. A. (2015). Two years of California's local control
funding formula: Time to reaffirm the grand vision. Policy. Stanford, CA: Policy
Analysis for California Education, PACE.
Kozma, R. (2008). 21st century skills, education and competitiveness. Tucson, AZ: Partnership
for 21st Century Skills.
Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over educational
goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39-81.
Loera, G., Nakamoto, J., Oh, Y. J., & Rueda, R. (2013). Factors that promote motivation and
academic engagement in a career technical education context. Career and Technical
Education Research, 38(3), 173-190.
Lombardi, A., Seburn, M., & Conley, D. (2011). Development and initial validation of a measure
of academic behaviors associated with college- and career-readiness. Journal of Career
Assessment, 19(4), 375-391.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From
research to results. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
97

Meeder, H. (2016). The power and promise of pathways. Columbia, MD: National Center for
College- and career-Transitions.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Moore, G. W., Slate, J. R., Edmonson, S. L., Combs, J. P., Bustamante, R., & Onwuegbuzie, A.
J. (2010). High school students and their lack of preparedness for college: A statewide
study. Education and Urban Society, 42(7), 817-838.
No Child Left Behind Act. (2002). Public law 107-110: An Act to close the achievement gap
with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications.
Perkins IV/CTEA. (2006). Basic definitions: Career & technical education act of 2006 (Perkins
IV) guidelines. Retrieved from http://department.sunysuffolk.edu/DeptDocs/Officeof
GrantsDevelopment_Docs/PerkinsIVBasicDefinitions.pdf
Pittman, K. J. (2010). College- and career-readiness. School Administrator, 67(6), 10-14.
Quintero, C. (2018). The role of district administrators in developing career technical education
programs to assist students in becoming college- and career-ready (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Regents of the University of California. (2015). A-G subject requirements. Retrieved from
http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/a-g-requirements/
Roderick, M., Nagaoka, J., & Coca, V. (2009). College readiness for all: The challenge for urban
high schools. The Future of Children, 19(1), 185-210.
98

Schwartz, R. B., Keppel, F., & Symonds, W. C. (2012). Pathways to prosperity project: Meeting
the challenge of preparing young Americans for the 21st century. Retrieved from
http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news-impact/tag/pathways-to-prosperity
Soulé, H., & Warrick, T. (2015). Defining 21st century readiness for all students: What we know
and how to get there. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(2), 178-186.
Taylor, M. (2013). Updated: An overview of the local control funding formula. Legislative
Analyst’s Office. Retrieved from http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2013/edu/lcff/lcff-
072913.pdf
Threeton, M. D. (2007). The Carl D. Perkins career and technical education (CTE) act of 2006
and the roles and responsibilities of CTE teachers and faculty members. Journal of
Industrial Teacher Education, 44(1), 66-82.
U. S. Department of Education. (2010). Application for grants under the investing in innovation
funds (i3) grant program. Washington, DC: Author.
Wonacott, M. E. (2003). History and evolution of vocational and career-technical education. A
compilation. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED482359.pdf

99

Appendix A: Survey and Interview Questions
Pertaining to the Research Questions
Research Questions:
1. What is the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education
programs to support college- and career-readiness?
2. What Career Technical Education programs have districts supported for implementation?
3. What resources do districts allocate to support Career Technical Education programs?
4. What types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in
improving college and career readiness?
Research Question Pertaining Survey Statements Pertaining Interview Questions
1 2. CTE programs are effective
in preparing students to be
college- and career-ready.

8. What role do you play in the
development of Career Technical
Education programs?
1 3. It is important that District
Administrators be
knowledgeable about CTE
Standards.
19. Does your district have
articulation agreements for CTE
courses with post-secondary
institutions?

1 4. It is important to make data
driven decisions regarding CTE
programs.

20. How do industry partners
support the development,
implementation and support of
CTE programs in your district?

1 5. To have an effective CTE
program, financial resources
must be allocated.

1 6. To have an effective CTE
program, resources must be
invested in human capital.

1 9. Industry partners are
beneficial in the development,
implementation, and support of
CTE programs.

100

Research Question Pertaining Survey Statements Pertaining Interview Questions
1 10. CTE programs in my
district are articulated with
postsecondary institutions.

1 11. There are internship
opportunities available to CTE
students in my district.

2 8. Articulation with
postsecondary institutions
encourages students to take
CTE courses.

9. What role do you play in the
development of Career Technical
Education programs?
2 10. CTE programs in my
district are articulated with
postsecondary institutions.

10. What CTE programs does
your district offer?
2 7. Students should learn using
the same equipment and tools
that are being used in the
industry.
15. What types of support do you
provide school sites to facilitate
the implementation and
sustainment of CTE programs?

2 9. Industry partners are
beneficial in the development,
implementation, and support of
CTE programs.

17. In a district with multiple
schools, how do you decide
which CTE programs to develop
where?
3 5. To have an effective CTE
program, financial resources
must be allocated.

14. What types of resources do
you allocate to support the
development, implementation and
support of CTE programs?

3 6. To have an effective CTE
program, resources must be
invested in human capital.

15. What types of support do you
provide school sites to facilitate
the implementation and
sustainment of CTE programs?
3 12. My district uses grant
money to fund CTE programs.

16. Who is involved in the hiring
process for CTE teachers in your
district?

101

Research Question Pertaining Survey Statements Pertaining Interview Questions
3 13. My district uses bond
money to fund CTE programs.

17. In a district with multiple
schools, how do you decide
which CTE programs to develop
where?

3 14. My district uses
LCFF/LCAP funding to fund
CTE programs.

18. What funding sources have
you used for CTE programs in
your district?
3 15. My district uses Perkins
funds to fund CTE programs.

4 4. It is important to make data
driven decisions regarding CTE
programs.

11. How do your CTE programs
prepare students to be college-
and career-ready?
4 9. Industry partners are
beneficial in the development,
implementation, and support of
CTE programs.

12. What types of CTE programs
have proven to be effective in
improving college- and career-
readiness?
4 10. CTE programs in my
district are articulated with
postsecondary institutions.

13. How do you determine if your
programs are effective in
preparing students for college and
career?
4 11. There are internship
opportunities available to CTE
students in my district.

102

Appendix B: Participant Letter

Dear Superintendent/District Administrator,
I am a doctoral candidate who is currently working on my dissertation. I am pursuing a Doctor
of Education (Ed.D.) degree in K-12 leadership at the University of Southern California, under
the guidance of Dr. Pedro Garcia and Dr. Rudy Castruita. The purpose of my study is to identify
the role of district administrators in the development, implementation, and support of Career
Technical Education (CTE) programs. Since Dr. Garcia and Dr. Castruita have identified you as
a successful leader in your district, I humbly request your assistance with my research endeavors.
Collecting data from highly effective leaders such as yourself is essential for the success of my
research and the completion of my degree.
I know that as leader, your time is very valuable. And so I kindly ask if you would be willing to
take a few minutes of your limited time to assist me with my research by clicking on the
enclosed link to complete a short survey. The survey asks leadership as well as support
questions and is designed to take no more than 15 minutes. Additionally, if you are willing to
participate in an interview that will take approximately 30 minutes, please provide me with the
best way to contact you to make arrangements.
This research study has been reviewed and approved by the University of Southern California
Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects Research (IRB). The IRB believes that the
research procedures safeguard your privacy, welfare, civil liberties, anonymity, and rights.
Please be assured that your participation and answers will be kept confidential and anonymous.
In no way will any data be presented in any manner where any individual can be identified.

If you are willing to assist me in my research study, please kindly click the following link to take
the survey at your earliest convenience: https://goo.gl/forms/9w5Zy9lRyzlTtbpu1
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (XXX) XXX-XXXX or via email at
atyner@usc.edu
Thank you very much for your time and support in my research endeavors. In exchange for your
participation, I will gladly provide you with an executive summary of my research

Sincerely,
Allan Tyner
Ed.D. Candidate USC

103

Appendix C: Survey Questions for District Administrators (Quantitative)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following:
(1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Agree 4=Strongly Agree)

*I am involved in the development of Career Technical Education programs.
Yes No

1. CTE programs are effective in preparing students to be college- and career-ready.
1 2 3 4
2. It is important to be knowledgeable about CTE standards.
1 2 3 4
3. It is important to make data driven decisions regarding CTE program development.
1 2 3 4
4. In order to have an effective CTE program, financial resources must be allocated.
1 2 3 4
5. In order to have an effective CTE program, resources must be invested in human capital.
1 2 3 4
6. Students should learn using the same equipment and tools that are being used in the
industry.
1 2 3 4
7. Articulation with postsecondary institutions encourages students to take CTE courses.
1 2 3 4
8. Industry partners are beneficial in the development, implementation, and support of CTE
programs.
1 2 3 4
9. CTE programs in my district are articulated with postsecondary institutions.
1 2 3 4
10. There are internship opportunities available to CTE students in my district.
1 2 3 4
11. My district uses grant money to fund CTE programs.
1 2 3 4
12. My district uses bond money to fund CTE programs.
1 2 3 4
13. My district uses LCFF/LCAP funding to fund CTE programs.
1 2 3 4
14. My district uses Perkins funds to fund CTE programs.
1 2 3 4

104

Appendix D: Interview Questions for District Administrators (Qualitative)
1. What is your age?
2. What is the highest education level you have completed?
3. How many years have you worked in education?
4. How many years have you worked in CTE or Vocational Education?
5. What did you teach before going into administration?
6. What school district are you employed by?
7. What is your job title?
8. What role do you play in the development of Career Technical Education programs?
9. What CTE programs does your district offer?
10. How were those CTE programs selected?
11. How do your CTE programs prepare students to be college- and career-ready?
12. What types of CTE programs have proven to be effective in improving college- and
career-readiness?

13. How do you determine if your programs are effective in preparing students for college
and career?

14. What types of resources do you allocate to support the development, implementation, and
support of CTE programs?

15. What types of support do you provide school sites to facilitate the implementation and
sustainment of CTE programs?

16. Who is involved in the hiring process for CTE teachers in your district?
17. In a district with multiple schools, how do you decide which CTE programs to develop
where?

18. What funding sources have you used for CTE programs in your district?

105

19. Does your district have articulation agreements for CTE courses with post-secondary
institutions?

20. How do industry partners support the development, implementation, and support of CTE
programs in your district?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to better understand the role of district administrators, especially superintendents, in developing Career Technical Education Programs so that students graduate college‐ and career‐ready. More specifically, this study intended to determine: 1) the role of district administrators in developing Career Technical Education programs to support college‐ and career‐readiness, 2) what Career Technical Education programs districts have supported for implementation, 3) what resources districts allocated to support Career Technical Education programs, and 4) what types of Career Technical Education programs have proven to be effective in improving college‐ and career‐readiness. This study used a mixed‐methods approach. Quantitative data was collected from 28 surveys of district administrators and superintendents. Five interviews with superintendents provided the qualitative data for the study. Through the process of triangulation, the study’s findings revealed that the role of district administrators and superintendents in the development, implementation, and support of CTE programs includes developing a vision, collecting data, identifying resources, and allocating them appropriately, and providing continuing support to all sites within their district. This study adds to current literature on effective CTE programs that improve college‐ and career‐readiness. The findings can be used by LEAs to improve students’ college‐ and career‐readiness and develop CTE programs that meet their students’ needs. Furthermore, the research findings can be used to determine CTE programs that have been effective in developing students that are college‐ and career‐ready.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The role of district administrators in developing career technical education programs to assist students in becoming college- and career-ready

PDF

The allocation of resources for career technical education programs that improve college and career readiness

PDF

Strategies utilized by southern California school districts to bridge the college and career gap through career technical education pathways in high schools

PDF

The role of leadership in creating guided pathways for career technical education

PDF

Assessing college and career readiness through the Senior Project program

PDF

College-educated immigrants' experiences in adult education career technical education programs

PDF

Multi-site case studies on the collaboration of career technical education teachers and core teachers

PDF

Equity and sustainability in career education funding: a gap analysis

PDF

Superintendents' viewpoint of the role stakeholders can play in improving student achievement

PDF

An examination of Oregon’s implementation of literacy and common core state standards: preparing students to be college and career ready

PDF

Developing a student athlete mentoring program to improve college readiness at a rural Hawaii public high school

PDF

Multi-site case studies on the collaboration of career technical education teachers and core teachers

PDF

Student engagement in an outperforming urban school as measured through cognitive, behavioral, and emotional indicators

PDF

""Having the right info"": College readiness as college knowledge among minoritized students in an urban education setting

PDF

Compassionate accountability: understanding the capacity of county offices of education to propel the school counseling profession forward

PDF

The experiences of successful higher education Latino administrators and educational leaders in selected western United States community colleges

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the mindful method Youth Empowerment Seminar (YES!) on students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, and academic performance for becoming college- and career-ready

PDF

Development of higher education student affairs staff to assist U.S. military veteran college students

PDF

Pivotal positions, critical experiences, and preparation programs in the career paths of superintendents

Asset Metadata

Creator Tyner, Allan Gregory Alexander (author)

Core Title The role of superintendents and district administrators in developing career technical education programs to assist students in becoming college‐ and career‐ready

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/10/2018

Defense Date 01/29/2018

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

Tag academic skills,A-G requirements,American College Test (ACT),career readiness,Career Technical Education (CTE),Career Technical Education pathway,college‐ and career‐readiness,college readiness,Common Core State Standards (CCSS),district administrators,employability skills/soft skills,Industry,Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP),Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF),Local Education Agency (LEA),No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB),OAI-PMH Harvest,Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT),stakeholders,technical skills,urban schools

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Garcia, Pedro E. (committee chair), Castruita, Rudy M. (committee member), Roach, John A. (committee member)

Creator Email alt4114@gmail.com,atyner@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-6651

Unique identifier UC11672133

Identifier etd-TynerAllan-6201.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-6651 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-TynerAllan-6201.pdf

Dmrecord 6651

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Tyner, Allan Gregory Alexander

Type texts

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

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA