This section presents findings related to the composition of consortia and funding for Tech Prep implementation. Coordinator characteristics are also presented to portray the characteristics of individuals who guide local Tech Prep efforts. Results from our field studies are presented to supplement the survey findings.
In both the 1993 and the 1995 surveys, respondents were asked to estimate the number of organizations involved in a local Tech Prep consortium based on the following categories: secondary schools, two-year postsecondary schools, four-year postsecondary schools, private-sector business and industrial firms, labor organizations, public community-based organizations, student leadership organizations, and other. In 1995, respondents were also asked to indicate the number of organizations in each category that were actively participating (defined in the survey as organizations that had students enrolled, actively involved in, and benefiting from a Tech Prep core curriculum.) Results show the number of organizations involved in a Tech Prep consortium increased in all categories (e.g., schools, colleges, businesses) from 1993 to 1995, although most of the changes were not dramatic (see Table 2). The largest increases were registered in the category of secondary schools where the mean increased from 12 to 14 from 1993 in 1995 and in business and industry where the average went from 23 to 27. Similar increases were noted in our five field sites. In these, new partnerships were formed with schools and businesses, partly in an effort to expand the scope and impact of Tech Prep but also to better accommodate expectations associated with the STWOA legislation (e.g., 50 percent membership representation by the private sector on governing boards.)
| Total Number in Consortium (1992-1993) | Total Number in Consortium (1994-1995) | Number Actively Participating in Tech Prep (1994-1995) |
||||||||||
| Organizations | No. & Percent of Total Sample | Mean | Median | SD | No. & Percent of Total Sample | Mean | Median | SD | No. & Percent of Total Sample | Mean | Median | SD |
| Secondary Schools | 364 (92%) | 11.60 | 8.00 | 11.15 | 325 (96%) | 14.28 | 11.00 | 12.77 | 317 (94%) | 11.22 | 8.00 | 9.60 |
| Two-Year Postsecondary Schools | 349 (88%) | 1.78 | 1.71 | 1.71 | 327 (96%) | 1.79 | 1.00 | 1.73 | 313 (92%) | 1.81 | 1.00 | 2.16 |
| Four-Year Postsecondary Schools | 152 (38%) | 1.64 | 1.00 | 1.19 | 171 (50%) | 1.99 | 1.00 | 2.13 | 117 (35%) | 1.62 | 1.00 | 2.05 |
| Private-Sector Business and Industry | 287 (72%) | 22.78 | 10.00 | 45.24 | 223 (66%) | 26.91 | 15.00 | 49.03 | 241 (71%) | 17.67 | 10.00 | 21.30 |
| Labor Organizations | 91 (23%) | 2.31 | 1.00 | 2.54 | 100 (29%) | 2.52 | 1.50 | 3.53 | 98 (29%) | 1.66 | 1.00 | 1.01 |
| Public Community-Based Organizations | 164 (45%) | 5.00 | 3.00 | 6.20 | 130 (38%) | 5.75 | 3.00 | 8.56 | 132 (39%) | 4.02 | 2.00 | 5.64 |
| Student Leadership Organizations | 83 (21%) | 4.36 | 2.00 | 4.62 | 80 (24%) | 6.36 | 4.00 | 9.78 | 73 (22%) | 3.73 | 3.00 | 3.87 |
Looking at the 1995 results only, we see a difference in the involvement of various organizations as compared to active participation. In all categories except one--two-year postsecondary schools (where students can matriculate to institutions other than the one in their district/region in order to participate in Tech Prep), fewer institutions were thought to be actively participating than merely involved. This finding is consistent with a conclusion drawn by Silverberg (1996a) that "All Tech-Prep member districts--and their schools--do not participate in Tech-Prep to the same degree. . . . `Membership' in a consortium reflects varying approaches to and levels of involvement in Tech-Prep implementation as well as different stages of development" (p. 13).
Based on estimates of the number of secondary and two-year postsecondary organizations reported in the 1993 survey, our previous NCRVE report indicated that well over three-fourths of the nation's two-year postsecondary schools had some level of involvement with a Tech Prep consortium, and approximately one-half of the nation's secondary schools were involved in some manner. Similar estimates were reported by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. for the national Tech-Prep evaluation[11]. Silverberg (1996a) estimated that, in 1993, 51 percent of all secondary districts had some level of involvement in Tech Prep. By 1995, her estimate had increased to 63 percent, based on data collected during the 1992-93 academic year. Our 1995 survey show a continual increase in involvement by secondary schools (increasing by three schools per consortium over the two years between 1993 and 1995), but the number of postsecondary schools leveled off over that period due to the fact that a large proportion were already involved in 1993.
Two-thirds of local consortia initiated planning and implementation for Tech Prep during the first two years federal Tech Prep funds became available for the 1991-92 and 1992-93 academic years. Respondents reported that 34 percent of the Tech Prep programs were started during the 1991-92 academic year; 33 percent began in the 1992-93 school year. Only 12 percent reported beginning Tech Prep initiatives as early as 1990-91. In prior years there were minimal numbers (less than 1 percent per year) reporting the initiation of Tech Prep. In the more recent academic years of 1993-94 and 1994-95, 11 percent and 7 percent of the respondents reported the onset of Tech Prep programs.
Not surprisingly, the years when beginning Tech Prep programs correspond closely to the years when federal Tech Prep monies became available. Forty percent of the respondents reported that funds were first received during the 1991-92 academic year, while another 42 percent first received funds in 1992-93. During 1993-94, 14 percent of respondents related that Tech Prep federal funds were first made available to them (indicating a few consortia were included in our original sample in 1993 that did not receive federal funding.)
In 1993, nearly all respondents reported receiving federal funding for Tech Prep through the Perkins Title IIIE Act; however, a few indicated federal funding was no longer available to them. For those who did receive federal funding for Tech Prep, the average grant amount increased from $97,343 in 1992-93 to $117,274 in 1994-95 (see Table 3)[12]. Most federal grants in 1994-95 were around $100,000, which represented a fairly substantial increase over the typical federal Tech Prep grant in 1992-93. Compared to other sources, federal grants far overshadowed other funding sources. However, many local consortia had created a more diversified funding base for Tech Prep in 1995 than in 1993.
| 1993 | 1995 | |||||||||||
| Source of Funds | No. & Percent of Total Sample | Mean | SD | Median | Min. | Max. | No. & Percent of Total Sample | Mean | SD | Median | Min. | Max. |
| Tech Prep Grant Funds (Perkins Title IIIE) | 373 (94%) | $97,343 | $85,619 | $70,800 | $7,500 | $625,000 | 289 (85%) | $117,274 | 100,446 | $10100 | $10,000 | $984,400 |
| Federal Grant Funds other than Perkins Title IIIE Tech Prepa | 101 (25%) | 62,221 | 82,026 | 30,784 | 2,000 | 500,000 | 78 (23%) | 84,255 | 150,613 | 30,000 | 1,000 | 1,000,000 |
| State Fundsa | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | 73 (22%) | 76,181 | 197,316 | 30,000 | 2,000 | 1,500,000 |
| Local Funds | 145 (37%) | 45,572 | 66,649 | 25,000 | 1,400 | 475,000 | 88 (26%) | 67,955 | 125,450 | 24,000 | 600 | 800,000 |
| Private-Sector Business & Industry | 42 (11%) | 9,228 | 11,858 | 5,000 | 500 | 45,000 | 39 (11.5%) | 22,534 | 56,353 | 5,000 | 200 | 300,000 |
| Private Foundationsb | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | 10 (3%) | 27,650 | 29,339 | 17,500 | 2,500 | 100,000 |
| Other | 18 (5%) | 29,744 | 40,145 | 10,000 | 500 | 140,000 | 16 (5%) | 73,697 | 93,752 | 39,985 | 1,000 | 300,000 |
| Total | 383 (96%) | 130,987 | 116,358 | 96,000 | 7,000 | 700,000 | 309 (91%) | 180,990 | 215,559 | 120,000 | 7,000 | 1,625,000 |
| Notes: | aIn the 1993 survey, this category was defined as "state or federal grant funds other than Perkins Title IIIE Tech Prep funds," so a separate category for "state funds" was not provided and comparable data is not available. |
| bIn the 1993 survey, the category of "private foundations" was not provided, so comparable data is not available. |
Approximately one-fourth of the respondents received funds from other federal government sources to support Tech Prep for the 1994-95 academic year (about the same percentage as in 1992-93); however, the average amount of funding from other federal sources had increased by more than one-third. Also in 1995, about one-fourth of the respondents reported financial support from state and local sources. Local funds received in the 1994-95 school year have increased by about 50 percent, on average, than in 1992-93. In either time period, far fewer respondents reported receiving private dollars to support Tech Prep activities than public funds. However, when private funds were reported, a noteworthy increase in was evident. The average level of private funding rose from approximately $9,000 to $22,000. But, again, these contributions are far less than the average level of funding from federal, state, or local sources.
Funding of the Field Sites. Observations in our five field sites show how funding has shifted from the time initial Tech Prep grants were awarded to local consortia, usually in 1991 or 1992, to the present. As the years passed, several of our field sites were recognized as demonstration sites, meaning they had additional federal or state funds (beyond planning or implementation) to disseminate "best practices" to other consortia. For example, in addition to its base grant, the East Central Illinois Education-To-Careers (ETC) Partnership received numerous demonstration grants to encourage the development and sharing of good ideas with other schools in the state. This consortium also received special funds to extend Tech Prep into the workplace through the development of a Tech Prep/youth apprenticeship model. To sustain newly forming collaborations, the East Central ETC Partnership acquired business/industry support far exceeding the average level of private-sector funding reported by our 1995 survey respondents. Businesses in the Danville area, a region hard-hit with unemployment and corporate downsizing during the 1980s and early 1990s, contribute generously of personnel and facilities to assist various facets of the local Tech Prep initiative.
Other consortia, such as the Miami Valley Tech Prep Consortium and the Mt. Hood Regional Tech Prep Consortium, received federal grants that dovetail with Tech Prep, providing added momentum to curriculum restructuring. With respect to the Miami Valley Consortium, the National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded Sinclair Community College a 5-year, $5 million grant to establish the National Center for Excellence for Advanced Manufacturing Education (AME), an national curriculum initiative designed to recreate the infrastructure of technological education. The local coordinator and other Tech Prep leaders work closely with staff of the AME Center on curriculum reform in the manufacturing and related areas. At the Mt. Hood Consortium, a USDE-funded demonstration project, known locally as "Blueprint for Success," plays an integral role in curriculum redesign for Tech Prep in the region. A unique contribution of the Blueprint project is that it "aligns educational standards with industry skill standards [and] aligns a common core of academic standards to industry skill standards and higher education" (Mt. Hood Regional Tech Prep Consortium, 1996, p. 1). In the cases of Miami Valley and Mt. Hood, additional grants have unique but related purposes with respect to Tech Prep. In both locations, additional federal funds have provided necessary resources to develop innovative curriculum that probably could not have happened otherwise. Local officials are quick to point out how they have gained efficiencies and momentum by integrating related curriculum efforts.
In addition to federal funds, all the field sites were awarded STWOA planning and/or implementation funds to strengthen the relationship between Tech Prep and STW. Even though Tech Prep funds dwarfed the limited amount of STWOA dollars received at the local level, having the combined resources provided an incentive to connect the two initiatives, particularly in rural areas where resources (both money and people) are often scarce. In several cases, particularly rural areas, minimal alterations of the Tech Prep administrative structure resulted in a local STW governing board and other partnerships. Where this occurs, Tech Prep and STW and the many stakeholders who support these initiatives, are nearly indistinguishable.
Local Expenditures. Finally, regarding funding, our 1995 survey asked where Tech Prep funds were spent. Respondents indicated most of the funds were used in the same five areas in 1993 and 1995: program administration, staff development, curriculum development, equipment purchases, and curriculum materials. Of these five areas, our most recent findings show a slight decrease in funds spent on equipment and a small increase in the monies spent on curriculum development and materials purchases. In 1993 and 1995, the same percentage of funds were spent on promotion and marketing. Funds for evaluation and assessment increased only slightly from 1993 to 1995, and the amount of monies reported for the "other" category tripled, but still accounted for a minimal amount of total funding (see Figure 1). The distribution of funds was fairly indicative of spending by our five field sites, although two sites reported a higher proportion of funds going for program administration, and one of these and another site showed a substantially larger appropriation for professional development. Also, although the funding for evaluation was not ostensibly larger for our field sites than the general population of consortia nationally, the monies devoted to evaluation seemed to be used in more valuable ways to document program and student outcomes.
In the 1995 survey, respondents were asked to indicate their perceptions of the level of support of several key interest groups. Vocational faculty topped the list of interest groups thought to offer the greatest support to the implementation of Tech Prep. Other interest groups seen as having a good to excellent level of support, based on a rating scale of 3.0 to 4.0 on a 5-point scale, were state agency personnel, local two-year postsecondary administrators, business/industry representatives, local secondary administrators, and students (see Table 4).
Figure 1
| Level of Support (1992-1993) | Level of Support (1994-1995) | |||||||||||||
| Interest Group | Poor | Fair | Good | Excellent | NA | Mean | SD | Poor | Fair | Good | Excellent | NA | Mean | SD |
| Vocational faculty | 1.3% | 8.9% | 38.5% | 51.1% | 0.3% | 3.40 | .70 | 0.9% | 6.5% | 40.1% | 52.2% | 0.3% | 3.44 | .66 |
| State agency personnel | 2.5% | 9.2% | 30.3% | 53.7% | 4.3% | 3.41 | .77 | 3.9% | 10.7% | 32.6% | 49.9% | 3.0% | 3.32 | .83 |
| Local two-year postsecondary administrators | 1.5% | 11.4% | 36.2% | 50.4% | 0.5% | 3.36 | .74 | 2.7% | 14.0% | 39.6% | 42.9% | 0.9% | 3.24 | .79 |
| Business/industry representatives | 2.3% | 10.2% | 37.6% | 47.2% | 2.8% | 3.33 | .76 | 2.7% | 13.7% | 44.8% | 37.3% | 1.5% | 3.19 | .77 |
| Local secondary administrators | 2.5% | 17.0% | 41.3% | 39.2% | 0.0% | 3.17 | .80 | 3.0% | 17.2% | 50.0% | 29.3% | 0.6% | 3.06 | .76 |
| Students | 2.0% | 14.6% | 48.3% | 25.3% | 9.7% | 3.07 | .73 | 1.2% | 16.9% | 55.5% | 22.8% | 3.6% | 3.04 | .68 |
| Secondary facultya | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | 1.2% | 18.7% | 63.5% | 16.3% | 0.3% | 2.95 | .63 |
| Secondary school board members | 3.6% | 20.6% | 39.1% | 31.2% | 5.6% | 3.04 | .84 | 5.6% | 22.3% | 38.9% | 20.8% | 12.5% | 2.85 | .86 |
| Counselors | 5.3% | 26.1% | 43.0% | 25.1% | 0.5% | 2.88 | .85 | 5.1% | 30.1% | 45.2% | 18.8% | 0.9% | 2.78 | .81 |
| Parents | 2.3% | 20.4% | 48.5% | 19.1% | 9.8% | 2.93 | .73 | 4.7% | 29.7% | 44.2% | 15.4% | 5.9% | 2.75 | .79 |
| Postsecondary facultya | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | 5.4% | 32.7% | 44.9% | 16.4% | 0.6% | 2.73 | .80 |
| Academic faculty | 4.3% | 30.5% | 43.7% | 21.1% | 0.5% | 2.82 | .81 | 3.8% | 35.1% | 49.0% | 11.2% | 0.6% | 2.68 | .72 |
| Labor union representatives | 7.5% | 13.7% | 13.2% | 11.9% | 53.6% | 2.64 | 1.04 | 9.0% | 15.6% | 16.2% | 12.6% | 0.6% | 2.64 | 1.08 |
| College trustee | 9.3% | 14.5% | 24.3% | 20.2% | 31.8% | 2.81 | 1.01 | 12.2% | 15.2% | 26.0% | 12.5% | 0.9% | 2.63 | 1.07 |
| Four-year college/ university personnel | 20.2% | 25.6% | 23.0% | 6.9% | 24.3% | 2.22 | .94 | 20.8% | 29.8% | 18.2% | 8.3% | 0.3% | 2.20 | .98 |
| Note: | aThe categories of "secondary faculty" and "postsecondary faculty" were not included in the 1993 survey. |
Other interest groups identified as being fair to good (2.0 to 3.0) in their support for Tech Prep were secondary faculty, secondary school board members, counselors, parents, postsecondary faculty, academic faculty, labor union representatives, and college trustees. While the mean level of support provided by four-year college/university personnel was within the fair to good range, there was a fairly large gap between the perceived level of support provided by the college trustees and the four-year college/university personnel. This finding corresponds closely to findings from the 1993 study. Little change has occurred in the support shown for Tech Prep by four-year colleges and universities, according to local coordinators.
Stakeholder Support of the Field Sites. Having the support of many different stakeholder groups was important to our field sites as well. Many of the same groups reported by the survey respondents to be supportive of Tech Prep were thought to be supportive by the five field-site coordinators. Personal interviews with representatives of groups such as vocational faculty, secondary and postsecondary administrators, business/industry representatives, and students suggested supportive attitudes toward Tech Prep. More skepticism was expressed by academic faculty, counselors, and parents. Generally, the more active the stakeholder groups were in implementation as planners, teachers, mentors and the like, the more supportive they were of Tech Prep. Of course, it is difficult to know how this relationship came about. Did positive attitudes toward Tech Prep encourage some individuals and groups to get involved or did greater involvement lead to more positive attitudes? In reality, both of these scenarios are likely to occur. Tech Prep coordinators emphasize that "forced participation" fails to produce positive results, so involvement needs to be encouraged, not mandated.
Tech Prep coordinators were working at their respective jobs for longer periods than was evident in 1993, which is understandable since Tech Prep has been in existence for more time (see Table 5). The percentage of coordinators who had been employed for three years or longer jumped from 14 percent in 1993 to 44 percent in 1995. Though some changes were evident in the funding sources for the Tech Prep coordinator position, the greatest change was seen in the number of positions that were not funded, but considered part of another regular job (usually an administrator position).
| Tech Prep Work Experiences | 1992-1993 Percent n=397 | 1994-1995 Percent n=339 |
| Number of Months a Tech Prep Coordinator | ||
| 1-6 | 6.0% | 6.7% |
| 7-12 | 20.4 | 1.0 |
| 13-18 | 18.9 | 7.5 |
| 19-24 | 22.2 | 6.2 |
| 25-30 | 15.6 | 7.4 |
| 31-36 | 2.5 | 17.6 |
| 36+ | 14.4 | 44.1 |
| Organization Employing Immediate Supervisiona | ||
| Two-year postsecondary college | 52.9 | 54.7 |
| Secondary school | 32.7 | 14.6 |
| Other | 17.6 | 9.8 |
| Four-year postsecondary college | 2.8 | 4.0 |
| Business and industry | 1.3 | 1.5 |
| Local school districtb | -- | 21.3 |
| State or regional office of educationb | -- | 4.9 |
| Position Funded as | ||
| Full-time | 37.0 | 35.4 |
| Part-time | 38.0 | 24.5 |
| Not funded (part of regular job) | 20.8 | 32.0 |
| Other | 4.2 | 8.1 |
| Hours Per Week Spent on Tech Prep | ||
| 1-20 | 44.3 | 42.0 |
| 21-40 | 32.5 | 36.6 |
| 41 or more | 23.2 | 21.2 |
| Notes: | aPercentages do not add to 100% since multiple responses were permitted. |
| bThe categories of "local school district" and "state or regional office of education" were not included in the 1993 survey. |
In 1993, 21 percent of the coordinator positions were not funded, whereas in 1995, 32 percent had no funding, suggesting that at least some coordinator positions that received part-time funding in 1993 shifted to no funding by 1995. Interestingly enough, results show little change in the number of hours devoted to Tech Prep. In 1995, similarly to 1993, the majority of local coordinators reported spending over 20 hours per week on Tech Prep activities. The commitment to funding Tech Prep administration without external funding would appear to call for greater support from local entities. Whereas the average level of local funding increased fairly dramatically from 1993 to 1995 (see Table 3 above); only about one-quarter of the 1995 respondents indicated receiving any local funds, suggesting large disparities across the nation. This finding raises the question of how the cost of local administration is being paid when neither grant funds or local funds are utilized. Are Tech Prep coordinators contributing their personal time, over and above other duties? How long can Tech Prep coordinators be expected to make such commitments? How long can Tech Prep be sustained under these conditions?
Similarly to findings for 1993, two-year colleges were the largest employers of Tech Prep coordinators, with approximately 55 percent of reporting their immediate supervisor to be in that type of organization The other predominant organization employing Tech Prep coordinators was local school districts. Similarly to our 1993 results, few coordinators were employed by four-year colleges, businesses, state or regional offices of education, or secondary schools (refer again to Table 5). Evident in this strategy is the awarding of responsibility and/or authority for administration to organizations that can provide a centralizing and coordinating function. Although difficult to measure, this aspect of Tech Prep implementation is important because of its contribution to more consistent quality and efficiency across schools and colleges.
Respondents were again asked in 1995 to indicate their previous professional work experience. Those who had prior administrative experience increased slightly from 53 to 56 percent from 1993 to 1995 (see Table 6). A slight increase was also documented in prior experience in business/industry employment from 28 to 31 percent. The percentage of coordinators previously engaged in vocational teaching, university teaching/research or guidance/counseling fell slightly, with the drop in past vocational teaching being more pronounced.
| Background | 1992-1993 Percent n=397 | 1994-1995 Percent n=339 |
| Previous Professional Work Experiencea | ||
| Educational administration | 53.1% | 56.2% |
| Vocational teaching | 47.4% | 39.8% |
| Academic teaching | 33.5% | 32.5% |
| Business/industry employment | 28.5% | 31.3% |
| University teaching/research | 16.1% | 13.1% |
| Guidance/counseling | 14.6% | 10.9% |
| Other | 13.4% | 8.5% |
| Highest Educational Degree Obtaineda | ||
| Advanced certificate or master's plus additional graduate studyb | -- | 33.9% |
| Master's degree | 63.5% | 32.7% |
| Doctoral degree | 20.2% | 16.2% |
| Bachelor's degree | 11.3% | 14.1% |
| Associate's degree | 2.8% | 0.9% |
| Other | 2.3% | 2.1% |
| Notes: | aPercentages do not add to 100% since multiple responses were permitted. |
| bThe categories of "advanced certificate or master's plus additional graduate study" was not provided in the 1993 survey. |
As a group, local coordinators were highly educated, with the majority having earned a master's degree or higher. In fact, the survey was changed between 1993 and 1995 to include a category on "advanced certificate or master's plus additional graduate study" to accommodate respondents who had given this information in 1993. By including the new category, we learned that approximately one-third of the respondents had an advanced certificate or master's course work and beyond. Sixteen percent had obtained a doctoral degree. The percentage of respondents with a bachelor's degree increased from 11 percent in 1993 to 14 percent in 1995 (refer again to Table 6).
Coordinators of the Field Sites. In all cases, the coordinators responsible for Tech Prep in our field sites were well educated, highly competent, politically connected (networked), and astutely savvy. In nearly all cases, the individuals held the position of Tech Prep coordinator since the time federal funds for Tech Prep flowed to their region in 1991 or 1992. The coordinators confessed that their understanding of the many dimensions of Tech Prep had grown enormously over these relatively short years. At first, they were relatively unaware of matters such as how to approach school restructuring, where to develop education and business partnerships, and why it is important to nurture STW transition. Only later, after having five or more years of experience, did they feel more confident in their ability to guide their local initiatives. In fact, most were highly sought-after speakers on critical issues pertaining to Tech Prep/STW implementation for state and national professional organizations such as the National Tech Prep Network (NTPN), the American Vocational Association (AVA) and the American Association of Community College (AACC).
Contributing to their success as local Tech Prep coordinators, all had a variety of work experiences within education and elsewhere. In fact, having a varied work history was thought to contribute to mastering the complex and multiple-faceted dimensions of the Tech Prep coordinator job. Although not a criterion for selection for our field study, all sites administered Tech Prep grant(s) from the community college, therefore acting as fiscal agents for the local Tech Prep initiatives. Knowing this, it is interesting that three of the five Tech Prep coordinators in our study were hired by the community colleges because of their recent high school teaching experience. The sincere commitment these individuals, along with their colleges, showed for improving secondary education seemed to be an asset to the overall Tech Prep initiative, according to the community colleges employing them. A fourth Tech Prep coordinator had recent community college teaching experience, but most of her current work with Tech Prep was done at the secondary level. While this coordinator maintained an office at the community college, she rarely used it, dedicating most of her time to working with the secondary district offices where policies affecting K-12 education were carried out. The one remaining coordinator spent the first part of his career in the military, more recently moving to public education. His recent experience in the military service is evident in his personal philosophy about education and his approach to management. Holding a staunch conviction to the need to make education more effective, this coordinator is committed to integrating regional Tech Prep and STW activities. For him, the challenge is to bring improved quality and efficiency to all of education by developing a coordinated Tech Prep/STW system for the region.
[12] For more detailed information on funding, readers are encouraged to review the Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. national evaluation of Tech Prep report by Silverberg (1996a), entitled The Continuing Developments of Local Tech-Prep Initiatives.