Vocational Technology.... The Little Train Of Change... (5-3)

Well what do we have here...? I shudder to think that vocational technology could even be pondered to be a failure! I can contest from the one day I spent here I witnessed a form of education that hasn't even come close to being grasped in public schools! Has society lost its mind!? Since when does an outlet of preparation for future learning as well success in the job market become a bad idea!? I am appalled that a technology preparation that functions like a college is considered a "non-factor in the player's market." When I say college, I understand that any class that involves technology is offered in a technology preparation campus. I would like to call this OTC. This document is telling me that working on a computer doesn't involve any skill and therefore any person that knows how to fix a computer isn't wanted in the job market. I think all of us are well aware whether we like it or not to admit that technology plays an important factor in the success of life.

This is the very idea that has put America in a crisis from their lack of understanding as to why jobs are being outsourcing from Japan, China, and India. These countries have found the way to better themselves while making an impact from what they couldn't grasp before Globalization 3.0.

When we order food at the local McDonald's do we ever stop to think... Where is my order taking place? "John Doe must be sick today because he wasn't at the first window to take my order."
Actually, Mr. Doe is being replaced and outsourcing by a calling center in India that is taking thousands of orders before collective America can even blink an eye. The man at the window is thanking the man in India that is taking away "cushy lifestyles" from Americans. The man in the window doesn't realize what he has done!

SO I HAVE TO SAY THIS AGAIN, AMERICA, THE "CLARION CALL" HAS LONG PASSED... AMERICA IS FALLING IN THE QUICKSAND! STOP GETTING FAT AND START GETTING TO WORK!

Just because President Bush has told America, "I am asking you to do something that has never been asked of you before and that is to do hard work." Doesn't mean he is free of his criticisms.

What he neglects to represent was followed by a war with no plan.
One of my favorite moments of his presidency was provided by comedian Lewis Black. He said, "Bush went into war alone because of the fact he meddled in other countries affairs and had no plan for success or recovery after the war." In his comedic standup he intimidated George W. Bush and Colin Powell. Bush had exclaimed in the skit that he didn't know anything else existed except the United States Of America. Then Colin Powell had told Bush you are about to engage in a war so that would mean you are fighting someone outside the United States. " Look George, here is a globe.... see.... countries."

Life doesn't have an "easy button" like the "Staples" slogan provides... maybe President Bush watches to much television. He asked Americans to do "something hard." To me, that seems contradictory because he watches hard work all day long at his ranch while never spending more then an hour a day at the White House. God only knows if he spends more then an hour there you would see his CIA (now known as the Completely Ignorant (Exponent Deleted) fly him out and have to spend their day on guard so he doesn't let himself choke on another pretzel.

The proposition "No Child Left Behind" has become an utter failure as well. Why must students suffer as a collective from a reform that doesn't guarantee success like it was promised to do so. The word "promise" is used loosely because of the fact Bush needs a victory and fast!

When the "War On Terror" or (ter' ) was launched, the after effects on the economy was overwhelming. Bush isn't to blame for the job loss... that is what happens in war. However, his remark of jobs increasing after the war effort is laughable. Apparently, he is unaware of the "business cycle." Which displays from the flowchart that jobs will go up eventually from the heavy loss because rebuilding occurs at some point. I don't want to hear how great everything is going because jobs are coming back! This happens if times are bad. People do what they have to in order to survive!

Now with the latest news, "President Bush has proposed a different approach, one that would allow, but not require, states to spend federal funds on career and technical education."

"Career and technical education success should be measured, in large part, by its contribution to improved achievement levels, as well as higher rates of high school graduation and enrollment in, and completion of, postsecondary education. "

President Bush, I hope you reconsider this reform for the sake of the future of the United States Of America. I'm telling this administration if they have any logical thought process that this would be a immeasurable mistake. All of the plans that have been distributed or currently in development are keys to "Pandora's Box." These boxes (that's right... I said more then one) were never meant to be open... but now the "Armageddon In Flame" has slipped in unnoticed. The image that was branded on the administration won't change for me, but the administration might want to hit that" C-Sharp" or the whole administration will come up flat.

AMERICA HAS NO TIME LEFT TO SIT AND GORGE BECAUSE THE FOOD IS GONE! IF THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACT ISN'T FOLLOWED IN TWENTY FOUR HOURS SOCIETY WILL BE DOOMED TO LIVE INTO WHAT THEY ACCEPTED AS A SUCCESS!

I GUESS THEY WERE TO BUSY COMPLAINING ABOUT THEIR SOCIAL LIFE... AND THEIR NEEDS. THE FUTURE RESTS IN THE HANDS OF THOSE WHO
"GET FAT." I ONLY HOPE THAT AMERICA RECEIVES THIS MESSAGE. OTHERWISE, LIFE WILL CONTINUE THE "DOWNWARD SPIRAL" THAT IS SO CATASTROPHIC THAT I MIGHT BE WRITING THIS. OH WAIT, I AM!

I am sincerely sorry if I have offended anyone with this standpoint. I feel as though that my opinion shouldn't be kept inside because I am so sick of people not standing up for what they believe in. If this post is too controversial feel free to dispose of it. However, I know my name won't be forgotten with this is sent.... (message sent.)

Best to all, -John Ott

P.S. I will send the link of the "Education Isn't Important" when I find it. (UPDATED) Use the link below... (The following explains the reason why people are "fat and lazy." I don't understand this at all. Only 27% said education beyond high school is essential! That is ridiculous!
http://www.detnews.com/2005/schools/0505/01/A01-167664.htm

Folks:

Something we had intended to add to the agenda for our next meeting.

Published: April 27, 2005

Commentary

Does Vocational Education Have a Role to Play In High School Reform?

By Gary Hoachlander

By adding a heavier academic load to their CTE programs, many students are choosing to work harder rather than withdraw from career and technical education.

As the high school attracts renewed attention as a focus of school reform, it’s an opportune time to ask some hard questions about the role vocational education, now more commonly called career and technical education, or CTE, should play in secondary education. The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act (Perkins III) is currently up for reauthorization, but President Bush has proposed a different approach, one that would allow, but not require, states to spend federal funds on career and technical education.

Current national and state school reform efforts are dominated, and rightly so, by the goal of boosting academic achievement for all students. High schools, however, have long had an additional goal: preparing students for success in the workforce. These two aims are not mutually exclusive—academics are, of course, essential in the workplace—but nor are they exactly the same. Given the academic emphasis of current reform efforts, as well as the dramatic changes in the world economy and labor markets, can we expect high schools to do both well?

We can start by examining what we know about career and technical education’s effectiveness, no simple task given the many expectations placed on career and technical education in policy and in practice. Besides charging CTE with strengthening students’ technical skills, preparing them for work, and improving their earnings, Perkins III established the premise that CTE must be accountable for academic achievement as well.

The legislation clearly indicates that career and technical education’s success should be measured, in large part, by its contribution to improved achievement levels, as well as higher rates of high school graduation and enrollment in, and completion of, postsecondary education. Commissioned by Congress to provide guidance for the Perkins reauthorization, the recent National Assessment of Vocational Education, or NAVE, report looks broadly at the effectiveness of career and technical education over the past 10 years. Its findings suggest that we may want to reconsider some of our expectations.

The NAVE report found career and technical education to be highly successful in improving earnings, for both students who enter the workforce right out of high school and those who work while going to college. The more CTE courses students took, the more their earnings increased. These benefits accrued across many groups, including students who are economically and educationally disadvantaged, those with disabilities, and both men and women. Students who took both a core academic curriculum and CTE courses reaped the greatest earnings benefits of all. Seven years after high school graduation, students earned about 2 percent more annually for each vocational course they took, or about $450 per course, based on average annual earnings of about $24,000. By this measure, career and technical education works.

One of the great ironies in the high school reform debate is that we criticize academic instruction for failing to do what it is supposed to do, while we condemn career and technical education for succeeding in doing what it was designed to do.

Critics of such education have long worried that vocational courses would lure students away from more rigorous academic study and doom them to stagnation in low-paying jobs. The NAVE report shows otherwise. Nearly all students (96.6 percent) choose (vocational courses are electives) to take some CTE courses in high school. About one-fourth of all high school seniors are vocational “concentrators” (students earning at least three credits in a single vocational program area). While it is true that lower-achieving students are more likely to be concentrators than higher-achieving students, fully 15 percent of all high school seniors with a grade point average of 3.5 or higher were concentrators in 2000.

Moreover, the 1990s saw vocational concentrators taking more—and more rigorous—academic courses. Some 50 percent of concentrators completed the “New Basics” academic core curriculum in 2000, up from about 19 percent in 1990, while the number completing a college-preparatory curriculum nearly tripled. They also improved academically. On 12th grade tests for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, vocational concentrators boosted their reading scores by about 8 scale points between 1994 and 1998, and their math scores by about 11 scale points between 1990 and 2000.

More vocational concentrators enrolled in postsecondary education immediately after high school during the 1990s than did in the 1980s (54.7 percent and 41.5 percent, respectively). It turns out that many enrolled later, so that by seven years after graduating from high school, nearly three-fourths of CTE concentrators had participated in postsecondary education or training to some extent. Eighteen percent eventually earned a bachelor’s degree, and by eight years after high school graduation, 53 percent of concentrators had earned a postsecondary degree or certificate.

---

What do these findings tell us? Participation in career and technical education has clear labor-market benefits, and these increase with greater participation. CTE has continuing appeal to students, and to a broader range of students than previously. By adding a heavier academic load to their CTE programs, many students are choosing to work harder rather than withdraw from career and technical education. There is some evidence that this coursework helps keep students who might otherwise drop out engaged in school and inspires more students to enter college. The coursework is certainly compatible with more rigorous academic study, improved academic achievement, and postsecondary enrollment.

But compatibility may not be enough. The crux of the matter for some high school reformers is whether or not career and technical education can contribute directly to improved academic achievement. From the NAVE report, the fairest assessment of this is that, although CTE does not detract from this goal, it does not necessarily aid in its realization. This despite a series of innovations ranging from tech-prep programs of study to career academies to efforts to incorporate more academic content into vocational courses.

Policymakers need to take these findings seriously and do some careful thinking about the role of career and technical education in high school. We can begin by asking how much we value the employment advantages that participation in such programs produces. Do these gains matter—for students who do not go to college, as well as for those who do and need to support themselves while in school? If we do care about these outcomes, we should be careful about adopting policies that, by design or by default, squeeze career and technical education out of the high school curriculum. We should also be wary of strategies that restructure CTE to produce greater academic achievement, but may jeopardize the earnings gains it now produces.

---

Can we have it both ways? Can we create in high schools a CTE curriculum that preserves real gains in earnings and employment while also promoting greater academic knowledge and skills? Perhaps. But the truth is that we don’t yet know. There are at least two major obstacles to finding out.

Even where CTE supposedly has been redesigned to promote such learning, such as in career academies, there is little evidence that this objective has been achieved.

First, most vocational curricula and instruction in high schools are not currently designed to produce academic learning. Career and technical education generally has been formulated to produce the very outcomes we observe: employment gains resulting from specific occupational preparation emphasizing basic technical and employability skills. One of the great ironies in the high school reform debate is that we criticize academic instruction for failing to do what it is supposed to do, while we condemn career and technical education for succeeding in doing what it was designed to do.

If we are really serious about expecting career and technical education to produce both academic and employment gains, there is a great deal of work to do on redesigning curriculum and teaching to accomplish these dual aims. Relatively little work has been done on the tedious but essential tasks of specifying clearly how to upgrade the academic and technical content of career and technical programs and courses.

Most CTE teachers have not been trained to exploit the academic content in technical instruction; most academic teachers know little about how their disciplinary knowledge is used in industries and workplaces. Other than exhorting educators to “integrate” and “articulate,” public policy has said very little about how this is to be accomplished.

Second, we don’t currently have measures that can appropriately assess career and technical education’s contributions to academic learning. Even where CTE supposedly has been redesigned to promote such learning, such as in career academies, there is little evidence that this objective has been achieved. It is possible that these reforms have simply failed. But it is also possible that we are using the wrong metric to evaluate them. So far, the only gauge of these efforts’ academic results has been standardized achievement tests. And, by that measure, these efforts have performed no better (or worse) than the conventional academic curriculum. Standardized tests are vital to our efforts to improve student performance, but the fact is that they assess very narrow definitions of academic achievement. For the most part, they do not measure students’ diagnostic abilities, capacities for bringing interdisciplinary knowledge to bear on complex problems, understanding of systems, or facility in applying abstract knowledge and academic skills to authentic, real-life situations.

Are the new forms of vocational education that are emerging in some high schools around the country producing this kind of learning? They purport to be, but we don’t really know because we do not have valid, reliable assessment instruments to tell us whether or not this learning is occurring. It would be a good idea to find out. Public policy could help by clarifying the kind of academic and technical learning outcomes we seek from restructured career and technical education, and by supporting the substantial research-and- development effort needed to create good assessments.

Is there a role for career and technical education, as conventionally practiced or substantially restructured, in high school reform? It depends. If our only objective is academic achievement, especially as measured by existing standardized assessments, the answer is probably no. There is very little evidence that career and technical education, in its traditional or emergent forms, will produce this result. However, if we believe that the earnings and employment advantages resulting from CTE are important, in tandem with academic achievement, we should be careful about casually casting career and technical education aside. A policy of benign neglect is always hazardous.

If we believe that career and technical education could play a significant role in high school improvement if it is refashioned to produce not only earnings gains but also increased academic mastery, then we have considerable work to do.

Federal policy could lead this effort. But to achieve significant progress, the legislative agenda needs to address more squarely the difficult challenges posed by curriculum redesign, professional development, and expanded assessment. Anything less will squander an important opportunity to make both employment and higher academic achievement accessible to the large numbers of high school students left behind in our current system.

Gary Hoachlander is the president of MPR Associates Inc., an education research and consulting firm with offices in Berkeley, Calif., and Washington. MPR Associates was one of several firms conducting research for the recent National Assessment of Vocational Education.